Re: Searching for maintainers: dual monitor patches, bdflush

Pavel Machek (pavel@Elf.ucw.cz)
Sun, 21 Jun 1998 16:02:33 +0200


Hi!

> >Why do you need to rewrite it?
>
> I think that the kernel must not depend on userlevel stuff to be completly
> functional. I know that it' s just completly functional but pratically
> everybody uses update to avoid losing a lot of data if the machine crash
> so _I_ think that it would be nice to have update running in the kernel
> itself (tunable with /proc/sys/... of course). update don' t worry me
> though ;-).

I consider it feature to be able to kill() update. I see no reason why
I should mount /proc, echo 0 to some strange /proc/sys directory, ...,
when current behaviour is just fine. Also, it has good sense to be
able to renice update, and it has good sense to be able to add some
features into update (like sleep) which do not really belong in
kernel.

So, please, do not put bdflush functionality into kernel.

Pavel

-- 
I'm really pavel@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz. 	   Pavel
Look at http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/ ;-).

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu