On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, Chris Noe wrote:
> > and then nuked completely in 2.5.
> [...]
>
> I'll go for that. Deprecate it now, remove it in 2.5 entirely (unless
> someone says to l-k "ack, I *need* zImage").
well, I don't strictly *need* zImage, but, when you are explaining to
someone how Linux kernel boots on x86 it is so much easier to follow all
the details in the case of zImage than bzImage. But, I agree, it is purely
academical thing - I treat all Linux kernels as something one should print
out and hang on the wall :)
> At some point in 2.5, if not
> right away, I say we should go ahead and make zImage (no pun intended)
> effectively do all the bzImage stuff, but just not make the fact that it
> is a bzImage known (ie there's only one target in the makefile, zImage,
> which does all the stuff that bzImage does atm). Cosmetic, but seemingly
> the more logical way to do it.
this one is probably a bad idea because it is misleading. If I type "make
zImage" I want either a well-known zImage or an error message.
Regards,
Tigran
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 15 2000 - 21:00:34 EST