From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 2 May 2002 12:39:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 2 May 2002 12:39:24 -0400 Received: from [195.63.194.11] ([195.63.194.11]:50190 "EHLO mail.stock-world.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 2 May 2002 12:39:22 -0400 Message-ID: <3CD15CFA.1090208@evision-ventures.com> Date: Thu, 02 May 2002 17:36:26 +0200 From: Martin Dalecki User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; pl-PL; rv:1.0rc1) Gecko/20020419 X-Accept-Language: en-us, pl MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Gooch CC: arjanv@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: kbuild 2.5 is ready for inclusion in the 2.5 kernel In-Reply-To: <3CD13FF3.5020406@evision-ventures.com> <3CD15996.8EB1699F@redhat.com> <200205021559.g42Fxud19755@vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Użytkownik Richard Gooch napisał: > 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! It just DOES NOT BELONG in to the kernel-space. No matter what percentage of supposed problems it solves and how many problems it in reality adds...