On October 22, 2001 08:00 pm, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 03:02:49PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > I have never done this comparison myself, but I was wondering how ugly
> > > it would be if stable versions of Andrea's and Rik's VMs were both
> > > available in your/Linus' kernel as compile-time options. Assuming that
> > > each provides better performance under certain conditions, wouldn't
> >
> > Too ugly for words.
>
> Though, if it's done from the start of 2.5, it could be very possible. Is
> there a way to make it non-ugly?
No, not within the current structure of our config system. It touches the
tree in many places break out nicely into a few defines or separable files.
Both mm variants are under heavy development and injecting them with a bunch
of cruft just to make it compile-time configurable would only add to the
difficulty of maintaining a subsystem that already is very difficult to
maintain.
This is properly a patch.
If you want to argue for something, argue for giving config the ability to
apply patches, that would be lots of fun.
-- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 23 2001 - 21:00:32 EST