From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@mindspring.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: why does x86 "make defconfig" build a single, lonely module?
Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 12:37:39 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705131237190.924@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1179073670.3723.48.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com>
On Sun, 13 May 2007, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 12:20 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > since this thread looks like it's going to get away from me in a
> > hurry :-), my only point in asking was to point out that that lone
> > module was the only thing preventing the build from being module-free.
> >
> > i'm not saying that that's *necessarily* a good thing, but it just
> > strikes me as odd that, out of all of the possible modules that might
> > be selected in a default config for x86, this was the *only* one that
> > was picked.
> >
> > i just think it's a bit weird, that's all.
>
> It's designed on the predicate that people who want to be module free
> will actually set CONFIG_MODULE=n.
>
> If you set CONFIG_MODULE=y and build SCSI we assume you could have a
> SCSI driver module at some point, which would necessitate the wait scan
> module.
ok, fair enough. thanks.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
http://fsdev.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
========================================================================
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-13 16:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705131106160.3197@localhost.localdomain>
2007-05-13 16:06 ` why does x86 "make defconfig" build a single, lonely module? Dave Jones
2007-05-13 16:10 ` James Bottomley
2007-05-13 16:18 ` James Bottomley
2007-05-13 16:30 ` Dave Jones
2007-05-14 9:35 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-14 9:45 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-14 12:00 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-14 12:23 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-14 14:31 ` James Bottomley
2007-05-15 0:41 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-15 11:26 ` Simon Arlott
2007-05-15 12:02 ` Asynchronous scsi scanning Matthew Wilcox
2007-05-15 16:30 ` Simon Arlott
2007-05-15 17:29 ` Matthew Wilcox
2007-05-15 21:56 ` [PATCH] SCSI: Let users disable SCSI_WAIT_SCAN to be built Stefan Richter
2007-05-16 14:43 ` Stefan Richter
2007-05-17 14:00 ` James Bottomley
2007-05-17 17:02 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-15 23:27 ` Asynchronous scsi scanning Satyam Sharma
2007-05-15 23:28 ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-05-15 23:49 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-16 2:51 ` Matthew Wilcox
2007-05-16 2:59 ` Roland Dreier
2007-05-17 17:13 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-17 17:20 ` Matthew Wilcox
2007-05-17 17:41 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-17 18:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-05-17 18:47 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-17 18:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-05-17 19:04 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-17 19:39 ` Matthew Wilcox
2007-05-17 19:43 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2007-05-17 21:30 ` Matthew Wilcox
2007-05-17 21:42 ` Dave Jones
2007-05-17 22:00 ` Peter Jones
2007-05-18 14:00 ` Stefan Richter
2007-05-18 5:28 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-18 11:24 ` Matthew Wilcox
2007-05-18 13:14 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-18 3:41 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-17 17:32 ` sysfs makes scaling suck " Benjamin LaHaise
2007-05-17 17:45 ` James Bottomley
2007-05-17 17:49 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2007-05-19 16:30 ` Greg KH
2007-05-17 22:24 ` Peter Jones
2007-05-13 16:20 ` why does x86 "make defconfig" build a single, lonely module? Robert P. J. Day
2007-05-13 16:27 ` James Bottomley
2007-05-13 16:37 ` Robert P. J. Day [this message]
2007-05-13 17:42 ` Simon Arlott
2007-05-13 17:48 ` James Bottomley
2007-05-13 18:26 ` Simon Arlott
2007-05-13 18:45 ` Dave Jones
2007-05-13 18:45 ` James Bottomley
2007-05-14 17:29 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-14 18:46 ` Alan Cox
2007-05-14 20:06 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-13 16:28 ` Dave Jones
2007-05-13 20:38 ` Simon Arlott
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.0705131237190.924@localhost.localdomain \
--to=rpjday@mindspring.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox