Re: Will 2.6 require Python for any configuration ? (CML2)

From: Samium Gromoff (_deepfire@mail.ru)
Date: Thu Aug 23 2001 - 15:41:39 EST


      Hey guys, can`t resist more this thread... =)

   1. I heard a lot of arguments why _not_ to include
  python. Also alot of arguments why _ignore_ the arguments
  to _not_ include python.
    BUT! No arguments why to _include_ it...
  kinda disbalance as i see.

  2. Those who tells that playing with 21M large kernel
 isnt any better than playing with kernel PLUS 20M
 python are, politely saying, definitely not right.

  3. i ALREADY cannot tolerate how current config
 heartbrakingly slow crawls on my p166. No, do not ask
 me why is it so. just think: we have 3k strings, 3k
 deps, and asketic ncurses interface. So WHY is it so
 slow? And you think python-powered config engine
 will be at least _approachingly_ tolerable on an
 386??? Nah. It wont.

 What we win in the true C way:
      speed, size
 What we lose --------=-------:
      maintainability?????? (i`ll believe if esr
 will tell so...)

---

cheers,

Samium Gromoff - 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 : Thu Aug 23 2001 - 21:01:01 EST