From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:10:35 +0300 From: Anton Farygin To: ALT Linux kernel packages development Subject: Re: [d-kernel] [kaos@ocs.com.au: Re: integration support for 2.6.0 kernel in modutils] Message-ID: <20040224081035.GG12052@master.altlinux.ru> References: <20040223101948.GA13294@sam-solutions.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20040223101948.GA13294@sam-solutions.net> X-BeenThere: devel-kernel@altlinux.ru X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list Reply-To: ALT Linux kernel packages development List-Id: ALT Linux kernel packages development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 08:10:36 -0000 Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: Очень хорошо. И что будем делать ? On Mon, Feb 23, 2004 at 12:19:48PM +0200, Gleb Stiblo wrote: > -- > Gleb Stiblo AKA UlfR > > Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:58:58 +1100 > From: Keith Owens > To: Gleb Stiblo > Subject: Re: integration support for 2.6.0 kernel in modutils > X-Original-To: stiblo > Delivered-To: stiblo@pc346.belcaf.minsk.by > X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 01/15/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 > In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:11:09 +0200." > <20040210111109.GA23512@sam-solutions.net> > X-Spam-Scanned-By: Spamassassin > X-Virus-Scanned-By: AVP Antivirus > X-Spam: NO > X-Spam-Rating: 83 > > On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:11:09 +0200, > Gleb Stiblo wrote: > >KO> I have received your mail but I am on vacation until January 30. > >Hope your vacation was fine. So can we return to my question? :) > > I had a look at your code over the weekend. Sorry, but I do not want > to include kernel 2.6 support in modutils while keeping the same config > language. > > The modutils 2.4 config language was never designed nor was it ever > well defined. The "language" just grew as people came up with ideas. > There are nasty corner cases, recursion problems and features that > people rely on but those features only work by accident. I could never > make changes to modutils config because it would break existing > behaviour that people were replying on. > > I was planning to completely redo the modutils config language for 2.6 > when Rusty came up with the in kernel linker. To some extent I am glad > that 2.6 has simpler features, there is less to go wrong. > > If you want to use some of the more complex features of modutils 2.4 > configuration then the best approach is to extend mit with a well > designed and documented config language. Make sure that people agree > what a featre should do before adding it. Keeping the old and broken > 2.4 config language will only propagate problems that I have been > trying to get rid of for years. > _______________________________________________ > devel-kernel mailing list > devel-kernel@altlinux.ru > http://altlinux.ru/mailman/listinfo/devel-kernel