>Hmm, I like it. But I prefer to pull the depmod code into the source
>too, to keep it all under one roof.
I have been thinking about splitting depmod into two programs:
the program as originally designed that generates modules.dep and one
that generates hardware support files. The latter could be
distributed in the Linux kernel tree and perhaps installed in
/lib/modules/<version>/bin/ to make it easy to change support table
formats as needed.
>The ELF dependence will go back in eventually, but that's trivial.
I'm guessing this is for symbols. If it's for something other
reason, I'd be curious to know it.
>Hmm, Adam, do you want to reverse positions and become
>module-init-tools maintainer? I'll send patches to you, instead of
>vice versa. I'll release a 0.8 with the patches I have so far, then
>hand it over if you want.
>Thoughts?
>Rusty.
I'm honored by the offer, but I have not seen any convincing
accounting of real benefits and costs that shows that it is a win to
have the module loader in kernel memory. I might be interested in
maintaining a small modutils that could be compiled to support either
the in-kernel module load or a user level method (or both) so as to
avoid unnecessary differences between the user level and in-kernel
methods, given that the code that is specific to the kernel module
loader would be small.
Adam J. Richter __ ______________ 575 Oroville Road
adam@yggdrasil.com \ / Milpitas, California 95035
+1 408 309-6081 | g g d r a s i l United States of America
"Free Software For The Rest Of Us."
-
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/