From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Buesch Subject: Re: [PATCH] Force UNIX domain sockets to be built in Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 20:05:16 +0100 Message-ID: <200712312005.17384.mb@bu3sch.de> References: <200712311818.12825.mb@bu3sch.de> <64bb37e0712311037w42bae43ayb3c10b2e0310586d@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Alan Cox" , "Adrian Bunk" , "Bodo Eggert" <7eggert@gmx.de>, "Jan Engelhardt" , devzero@web.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: "Torsten Kaiser" Return-path: Received: from vs166246.vserver.de ([62.75.166.246]:59714 "EHLO vs166246.vserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751244AbXLaTGT (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Dec 2007 14:06:19 -0500 In-Reply-To: <64bb37e0712311037w42bae43ayb3c10b2e0310586d@mail.gmail.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Monday 31 December 2007 19:37:43 Torsten Kaiser wrote: > The base problem is that there already are many options to break > external modules. (CONFIG_MODULES=n ;) ) Exactly. There already are enough ways to break external modules. No need to introduce more. ;) > The question I can't answer in this context is: Do distributions want > to support external modules? > Only if yes, your argument is valid. But then they could just disable > this feature and prevent this kind of bugreports. That's my point. Nobody will risk bugs to save a few bytes of memory. -- Greetings Michael.