Re: kernel structures in 2.0.29->2.0.30
Rob Hagopian (Rob.Hagopian@vuser.vu.union.edu)
Sun, 27 Apr 1997 13:30:33 -0400
>It's not my decision to make. But personally, I think "stable kernel"
>should imply as little change as possible at any external interfaces,
>preferrably none. The idea of adding a layer to isolate the module
>from these changes seems like the cart pulling the horse to me, or to
>be more vernacular, ass-backwards. Furthermore, it doesn't really save
>any work. Someone with AFS source access still has to make a new
>release every time kerne; interfaces chage, but the new component also
>has to be recompiled when the AFS module changes.
Not if the AFS "wrapper" is integrated into the kernel tree (a module that
then loads more object code... hmmmm...)
ObKernelBloat: if we did that for everyone the kernel would rise in size some.
-Rob H.