Scott Bronson wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2002-08-17 at 15:57, Ruth Ivimey-Cook wrote:
> > a) some people want basically module-less kernels
>
> Everyone I've heard advocating a moduleless kernel uses an argument that
> boils down to "it's slightly more secure." Does anybody have a GOOD
> reason for not using modules?
1. "No need". Doesn't apply to everybody of course, but
many have enough memory and don't plug in much new stuff.
Recompiling & booting for the rare occation where you
bought a new usb device is ok.
2. A simpler setup. No /etc/modules.conf to worry about.
Compiling ALSA into the kernel surely made life easier.
even more so when also using devfs...
3. Performance. Compiled-in stuff is always there, and
on x86 it exists in the kernel's 4M page so no
TLB loading overhead either.
> Someone replied off-list saying that initrds are too hard to create.
Actually, that isn't an argument for linking everything in.
All you need is the drivers for your root fs and root device.
The rest may still be modular, loaded from /lib/modules on
that root fs.
Helge Hafting
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 23 2002 - 22:00:16 EST