Re: RFC: [2.6 patch] disallow modular IPv6

[David S. Miller]

On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 21:32:30 -0300
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Em Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 02:14:39AM +0200, Adrian Bunk escreveu:
> > On Sun, Sep 28, 2003 at 08:39:10PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > What about the following solution (the names and help texts for the
> > config options might not be optimal, I hope you understand the
> > intention):
> > 
> > config IPV6_SUPPORT
> > 	bool "IPv6 support"
> > 
> > config IPV6_ENABLE
> > 	tristate "enable IPv6"
> > 	depends on IPV6_SUPPORT
> > 
> > IPV6_SUPPORT changes structs etc. and IPV6_ENABLE is responsible for 
> > ipv6.o .
> 
> Humm, and the idea is? This seems confusing, could you elaborate on why such
> scheme is a good thing?

I think the idea is totally broken.  At first, Adrian comments that
changing the layout of structs based upon a config option is broken,
then he proposes a config option that does nothing except change the
layout of structures.

The current situation is perfectly fine.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/