> On Wed, Feb 25, 1998 at 12:35:58PM -0800, Gerhard Mack wrote:
> > On Wed, 25 Feb 1998, Bill Broadhurst wrote:
> >
> > > Not blinded, just indifferent. I don't want GGI in the kernel
> > > because I don't want to waste space on my system for it's code.
> > > Not that space is an issue, I have many megabytes free. I just
> > > object to having to waste any of it just because some bimbo
> > > wants graphics.
> >
> > It seems to me you could make the same argument for most of the stuff
> > Linux supports, I don't use ham or appletalk but I am willing to "waste
> > the space" so some other people can use it. This debate should IMHO be
> > based on the techical merrits of having ggi vs bot having it not on
> > such an outright selfish approach as I have just read.
> >
> > If you don't like it and it's there don't compile it.
> >
>
> I never do. But this wasn't about something that's already there.
> This was about adding something new.
>
> Besides, the code is in the tree whether it's compiled or not. THAT's
> to what I object.
>
>
1) You are free to take a fireaxe to anything you don't like in your tree.
...
N) You are free to take a fireaxe to anything you don't like in your tree.
-Mike
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu