Re: RE : 2.6.6-rc3-mm2 : REGPARAM forced => no external module with some object code only

Jan-Benedict Glaw
2004-05-06T12:56:39Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1291 bytes --]

On Thu, 2004-05-06 08:44:54 -0400, Zephaniah E. Hull <warp@babylon.d2dc.net>
wrote in message <20040506124454.GA12921@babylon.d2dc.net>:
> On Wed, May 05, 2004 at 01:18:09PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Eric Valette <eric.valette@free.fr> wrote:
> > >
> > > The Changelog says nothing really important but forcing REGPARAM is
> > > rather important : it breaks any external module using object only code
> > > that calls a kernel function.
> >
> > This is why we should remove the option - to reduce the number of ways in
> > which the kernel might have been built. Yes, there will be a bit of
> > transition pain while these people catch up.

Sorry, missed the previous mail...

Well, practically, reducing options will help compatibility, *but*
personally, I don't see a problem there. Linux only claims limited
source compatibility, so I don't see much of a problem there. If binary
modules fall down to their feet, they need to catch up.

MfG, JBG

--
Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw@lug-owl.de . +49-172-7608481
"Eine Freie Meinung in einem Freien Kopf | Gegen Zensur | Gegen Krieg
fuer einen Freien Staat voll Freier Bürger" | im Internet! | im Irak!
ret = do_actions((curr | FREE_SPEECH) & ~(NEW_COPYRIGHT_LAW | DRM | TCPA));

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]