Re: [Announce] Linux-tiny project revival

[Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>]

On Thursday 20 September 2007 4:22:37 pm Jared Hulbert wrote:
> > > I think that this idea is not worth it.
>
> Don't use the config option then....
>
> > My problem is that switching off printk is the single biggest bloat
> > cutter in the kernel, yet it makes the resulting system very hard to
> > support.  It combines a big upside with a big downside, and I'd like
> > something in between.
>
> It's not such a big downside IMHO.  You can support a kernel without
> printk.  Need to debug the kernel without printk?  Use a JTAG
> debugger...

I don't actually own a jtag.  (I do use qemu's gdb support to debug the target 
kernel, but it's darn awkward and has limited hardware support.)

> If you have a system that actually configures out printk's, chances
> are you don't have storage and output mechanisms to do much with the
> messages anyway.  Think embedded _products_ here.

I plead the fifth.

> Sure the 
> development boards have serial, ethernet, and all that jazz but tens
> of millions of ARM based gadgets don't.

I wonder if that "Monsoon" gadget does?  (Sorry, just on my mind today...)

Rob
-- 
"One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code."
  - Ken Thompson.