Re: [EXAMPLE-PATCH] /proc/config

david parsons (o.r.c@p.e.l.l.p.o.r.t.l.a.n.d.o.r.u.s)
1 Jun 1998 11:22:24 -0700


In article <linux.kernel.19980601160932.04779@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>,
Martin Mares <mj@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> Then make it a CONFIG option itself. It really annoys me when people
>> complain that something doesn't belong in the kernel because _they_ don't
>> want it and it makes the kernel bigger. Just answer No to the config
>> option!
>
> A kernel having zillions of config options which are rarely used, can
>be efficient, but it will be unmaintainable.

I'd bet this one won't be rarely used, because it's has the
potential of being really really useful at sites that have either a
lot of different Linux machines or that are maintained remotely.
I hope that /proc/config is included in 2.2 or is easily patched
against 2.2, because I know I'll be rolling it into as many of the 50
or so Linux machines I administer as soon as I start converting them
to 2.2.

____
david parsons \bi/ And a simple solution to maintainability is to lock
\/ down the internal kernel interfaces.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu