Re: kbuild 2.5 is ready for inclusion in the 2.5 kernel

[Arjan van de Ven <arjanv@redhat.com>]

On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 05:36:26PM +0200, Martin Dalecki wrote:
> U¿ytkownik Richard Gooch napisa³:
> > Arjan van de Ven writes:
> > 
> >>someone using perl to replace the built-in kernel version in the .o
> >>file)
> > 
> > 
> > Oh, my! Do people really do that?!?
> 
> Yes they do, if they wont for example to get some
> PCTEL win chip driver working. No matter what Alan and some others
> think is good for them :-).
> 
> The main problem with mod-versions is the simple fact
> that policy doesn't belong in to the kernel it belongs
> in the user space. And mod-version is *just policy*.
> 
> See... if some impaired project manager at some
> linux distro provider associated with hats,
> who does decisions like for example basing the main OS
> configuration tools on instable programming languages
> like python or perl... does decide that he needs
> the functionality of MODULEVERSIONS to get full controll about the
> users of his crappy product. Why the hell doesn't he let all this
> version checking be done for his own kernel cook-up entierly in
> his patched mod-utils? And entierly in USER SPACE? He does
> have the full scope of things which need the bless of versioning
> over them at his hands and there is *no technical* argument why this
> should be done in kernel space at all!


Thank you for this insult and welcome to my .procmailrc

Oh and please don't forget your medicine tomorrow as you did today..

 
> It just DOES NOT BELONG in to the kernel-space.

That's why it's done by modutils.