Re: Why not make Linux source modular?

Dick Balaska (dick@ct.widget.com)
Fri, 01 Mar 1996 01:29:50 -0500


At 12:47 PM 2/27/96 -0700, you wrote:

>Your point is understandable. However, a lot of the kernel code isn't used
>in a simple installation. Look at the Ethernet card drivers, how many
>of us have 5 different cards in a machine? Its the driver code have seems
>to be expanding by leaps. Perhaps just having "drop-in" source modules for
>netdrivers and SCSI drivers. These take 4.5 megs combined.

Ack.
My 386 contains a bastard 3C507. I had to learn to find kermit and rdate
for linux elsewhere from the distribution. (NOT on the CD)
It would have really sucked to have had to
"find http:// -name 3c507.tar.z -print" ;)
I think one of the beauties of Linux is that it supports LOTS of hardware.

Just think of the bandwidth that would be wasted trying to decide which
ethernet cards to include support for.

2$
_,--"
dik `-._ ________-_______ "----
_----'--'--------------------------------'--'----_
//_| | \ dick@ct.widget.com / | |_\\
(_____|_|__= Waterbury CT +1.203.596.7758 =__|_|_____)
_\______=___ http://www.ct.widget.com/~dick __=______/_
\/-(o)-~~-(o)-~~-(o)-`-------'-(o)-~~-(o)-~~-(o)-\/
Early Klingon Poetry:
Wustl, Wustl, ERR RIP MIT BOOT, BIND Wustl