From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: James Clark <jimwclark@ntlworld.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Patrick Mochel <mochel@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: Driver Model
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 15:05:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030902220544.GA20265@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200309022244.55500.jimwclark@ntlworld.com>
On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 10:44:55PM +0100, James Clark wrote:
>
> Would a more rigid 'plugin' interface and the concequent move from mainly
> 'source' modules to binary 'plugins' (still with source-code available for
> all to see) mean that (a) Kernel was smaller
No, we would have to support all versions of the APIs over time, making
the kernel larger and harder to maintain.
> (2) Had to be released/recompiled less
No, release frequency would have nothing to do with this.
> (4) Was EVEN more stable and (4) 'plugins' were more portable across
> releases and easier to install ?
No.
> I love Linux but this seems to be holding it back...
Please read the FAQ and many discussions about this very topic in the
past in the archives for why the kernel does not have a stable API
within itself.
That being said, the ammount the API changes over time in a "stable"
kernel series is usually quite small.
I understand coming from the Windows world this seems odd, but after a
bit of time you will see why it is quite nice.
Good luck,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-09-02 22:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-09-02 18:43 Driver Model James Clark
2003-09-02 19:13 ` Robert Love
2003-09-02 20:44 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-09-03 14:36 ` Stuart MacDonald
2003-09-03 14:52 ` Jan-Benedict Glaw
2003-09-03 14:57 ` Alan Cox
2003-09-03 15:13 ` Stuart MacDonald
2003-09-03 15:33 ` Mariusz Zielinski
2003-09-03 15:50 ` Stuart MacDonald
2003-09-03 16:02 ` Mariusz Zielinski
2003-09-03 17:58 ` Stuart MacDonald
2003-09-03 16:58 ` Alan Cox
2003-09-03 18:21 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-09-03 15:50 ` Mariusz Zielinski
2003-09-03 22:41 ` David Schwartz
2003-09-04 11:03 ` Alan Cox
2003-09-03 15:22 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-09-02 21:29 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-09-02 21:44 ` James Clark
2003-09-02 22:05 ` Greg KH [this message]
2003-09-02 22:08 ` Robert Love
2003-09-02 22:39 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-09-02 23:52 ` Andre Hedrick
2003-09-03 0:20 ` David Schwartz
2003-09-03 17:38 ` Andre Hedrick
2003-09-03 18:19 ` Alan Cox
2003-09-03 18:15 ` Andre Hedrick
2003-09-04 12:40 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2003-09-03 13:10 ` Alan Cox
[not found] <rtHg.3n0.9@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <rK5y.1xN.25@gated-at.bofh.it>
2003-09-03 18:42 ` Pascal Schmidt
2003-09-03 19:49 ` Andre Hedrick
2003-09-03 22:41 ` David Schwartz
2003-09-03 23:11 ` Pascal Schmidt
2003-09-03 23:33 ` David Schwartz
2003-09-04 1:38 ` Pascal Schmidt
2003-09-04 3:01 ` David Schwartz
2003-09-04 14:21 ` Pascal Schmidt
2003-09-04 1:37 ` Andre Hedrick
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=20030902220544.GA20265@kroah.com \
--to=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=jimwclark@ntlworld.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mochel@osdl.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