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, 24 Aug 2001 03:11:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 03:11:43 -0400 Received: from UNASSIGNED.SKYNETWEB.COM ([64.23.55.10]:41780 "HELO mx.webmailstation.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id convert rfc822-to-8bit; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 03:11:39 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Denis Perchine Organization: AcademSoft To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Will 2.6 require Python for any configuration ? (CML2) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 14:13:29 +0700 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.5] In-Reply-To: <20010822030807.N120@pervalidus> <20010824020119.42D951FD7D@mx.webmailstation.com> <20010824093508.A17415@francoudi.com> In-Reply-To: <20010824093508.A17415@francoudi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <20010824041500.BBE381FD71@mx.webmailstation.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday 24 August 2001 13:35, Leonid Mamtchenkov wrote: > Once you wrote about "Re: Will 2.6 require Python for any configuration ? > (CML2)": DP> On Friday 24 August 2001 02:41, Tom Rini wrote: > DP> > On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 09:26:33PM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote: > DP> > > >>>>> "Tom" == Tom Rini writes: > DP> > You've said this before. :) Just how small of an 'embedded' system are > DP> > you talking about? I know of people who do compile a kernel now and > DP> > again on a 'small' system, for fun. On a larger (cPCI) system, I > DP> > don't see your point. If you can somehow transport the 21mb[1] bzip2 > DP> > kernel source to your system, you can transport python. If you're > DP> > porting to a brand new arch, there's still good tests before you > DP> > have shlib support (You've mentioned that before too I think). > DP> There is another point why having Python installed is a problem. Usually when > DP> you install a server you remove everything from it because of space, and > DP> security reasons. The main security concern is the less is installed the > DP> better security is. I always remove python from any servers I have. As I > DP> remove guile, forth, and other useless (in terms of server) languages. Now > DP> you tell me that I should have this bloat installed just to configure my > DP> kernel. Do not you think that it is too much? Current kernel does not require > DP> anything like this. > Why should you have gcc and make on the server then? Compile you kernel > on another machine and then just install it on your servers. This way > you will not only save space and improve security, but also gain some > time, which is always good. That's nice idea, but it does not have any connection to subj. I prefer to do things the way I do them now. Anyway I need compiler for other things. I have lot of C/C++ daemons running, and want to fix problems right there. But having Python just to configure a kernel is an overkill. Why not Sather, or other rarely used language. Oberon-2 would be also nice. This is just a laziness of people who do not want to make things right. Actually interesting question is what Linus think of all this crap? -- Sincerely Yours, Denis Perchine ---------------------------------- E-Mail: dyp@perchine.com HomePage: http://www.perchine.com/dyp/ FidoNet: 2:5000/120.5 ----------------------------------