From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 12 Jan 2001 05:04:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 12 Jan 2001 05:04:15 -0500 Received: from neon-gw.transmeta.com ([209.10.217.66]:35589 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 12 Jan 2001 05:04:04 -0500 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: khttpd beaten by boa Date: 12 Jan 2001 02:03:32 -0800 Organization: Transmeta Corporation, Santa Clara CA Message-ID: <93mkpk$98k$1@cesium.transmeta.com> In-Reply-To: <20010112084259.B441@marowsky-bree.de> <14942.48157.259491.78067@pizda.ninka.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Disclaimer: Not speaking for Transmeta in any way, shape, or form. Copyright: Copyright 2001 H. Peter Anvin - All Rights Reserved Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Followup to: <14942.48157.259491.78067@pizda.ninka.net> By author: "David S. Miller" In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > Lars Marowsky-Bree writes: > > This just goes on to show that khttpd is unnecessary kernel bloat > > and can be "just as well" handled by a userspace application, minus > > some rather very special cases which do not justify its inclusion > > into the main kernel. > > My take on this is that khttpd is unmaintained garbage. > > TUX is evidence that khttpd can be done properly and > beat the pants off of anything done in userspace. > Then why don't we unload khttpd and put in Tux? -hpa -- at work, in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/