Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 29 Sep 2003 22:11:29 -0700 | From | "David S. Miller" <> | Subject | Re: RFC: [2.6 patch] disallow modular IPv6 |
| |
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 21:32:30 -0300 Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@conectiva.com.br> 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@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |