Re: GGI debate and etc.

Bill Broadhurst (
Wed, 25 Feb 1998 14:50:50 -0800

On Wed, Feb 25, 1998 at 12:35:58PM -0800, Gerhard Mack wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Feb 1998, Bill Broadhurst wrote:
> > Not blinded, just indifferent. I don't want GGI in the kernel
> > because I don't want to waste space on my system for it's code.
> > Not that space is an issue, I have many megabytes free. I just
> > object to having to waste any of it just because some bimbo
> > wants graphics.
> It seems to me you could make the same argument for most of the stuff
> Linux supports, I don't use ham or appletalk but I am willing to "waste
> the space" so some other people can use it. This debate should IMHO be
> based on the techical merrits of having ggi vs bot having it not on
> such an outright selfish approach as I have just read.
> If you don't like it and it's there don't compile it.

I never do. But this wasn't about something that's already there.
This was about adding something new.

Besides, the code is in the tree whether it's compiled or not. THAT's
to what I object.

  Dr. Bill Broadhurst                 | Independent contract Engineer.  
  (619)296-3710                       | BIOS, Firmware, & Diagnostics. | Finger for PGP 5.0 public key. 

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to