Re: New snapshot of modutils

H. Peter Anvin (hpa@transmeta.com)
15 Feb 1999 09:58:03 GMT


Followup to: <19990215085704.A9826@alienor.directprovider.net>
By author: Thierry Danis <danis@mail.dotcom.fr>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> On Mon, Feb 15, 1999 at 09:33:24AM +1100, Richard Gooch wrote:
> > Bjorn Ekwall writes:
> > > Please note that the depmod and modprobe utilities are back to C++.
> > > This is a result of a discussion in linux-kernel last week, and
> > > this is the way it has to be, in consideration of all involved.
> >
> > Arghh! Please, no! It was a disaster the last that happened. I saw at
> > least some of the discussion you referred to, but I didn't see a
> > consensus of why C++ was needed. We've been using C-based modutils for
> > years now. What is so broken that it requires C++?
> >
> I fully agree : last time a package has been rewritten in C++,
> it took monthes (if not more) to make it work the same way
> it did before.
>
> If you choose to do it anyway, consider the following points :
> o will the package be easier to debug by others than with
> C. At which cost for you ?
> o is C++ a viable solution in the long term (I guess that
> you do not want to rewrite it in two years again).
>
> Maybe C seems a little 'basic' to you, but by now, more people
> are good C programmers than there are good C++ programmers.
>

The big problem with using C++ for modutils is that the modutils is
one of the programs that you might need on an initrd or boot floppy.
Needing the C++ library is a *big* deal.

-hpa

-- 
"Linux is a very complete and sophisticated operating system.  There
are, and will be, large numbers of applications available for it."
    -- Paul Maritz, Group Vice President for Platforms And Applications,
       Microsoft Corporation [Reference at: http://www.kernel.org/~hpa/ms.html]

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/