In article <linux.kernel.Pine.LNX.3.96.1000526173056.28897B-100000@localhost>,
Jonathan Walther <email@example.com> wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>I agree; why CAN'T we configure the linux kernel more like we do the
>BSD ones? Their code and schema is very elegant and simple. And
>the source shouldn't be too hard to port over. David Parsons? Oh
>thats right, Linus ignores his patches. Oh well.
Well, the latest version of the memory detection code kills a couple
of machines, so it's probably just as well that it isn't in the
mainline kernel but instead crashing a couple of obsolete or
hideously expensive motherboards that I can't find or don't wish to
raid the LART-farm account for.
In any case, there *is* a BSD-style configurator for Linux, though
it hasn't been maintained since 1.2.x -- Scott Telford wrote one for
Linux years ago, and it died when he bailed on Linux in favor of the
*BSDs. It plus mconfig (which is written in C, which wins bigtime
because it's not extra programs that I have to lug around to make a
Mastodon system self-compilable) would make an almost perfect pair,
even if the underlying data structures are a little bit grotty.
The whoops-time-to-fork-the-linux-kernel showstopper for me is that
the reference implementation of this new configuration language is
written in Python, and, given the fluidity of linux kernel
development and the impossibility of getting patches to Linus unless
you're a member of the Core Team, this would probably mean that the
Python implementation would be the only implementation that would
david parsons \bi/ I can see using perl or python to parse a real BSD
\/ config file (though I'm trying to do it in C), but
the Linux kernel configuration arrangement is fairly
simple and, thanks to MEC, fairly clean.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 31 2000 - 21:00:17 EST