| 1 |
begin quote |
| 2 |
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 12:47:35 -0700 |
| 3 |
"C. Brewer" <cbrewer@×××××××××××××.net> wrote: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> Truly, it's too bad that external kernel modules couldn't be less |
| 6 |
> dependent on the version of the kernel they need to run on, and put |
| 7 |
> them in a separate place entirely, to be called by any kernel:( |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Well that would require a microkernel architecture, which Linux is not. |
| 11 |
Linux is a macrokernel with support for separate parts, but a module is |
| 12 |
extremely tied to the internals of the kernel, and unless Linus has a |
| 13 |
big change of mind, it won't change from this either. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
//Spider |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
begin .signature |
| 20 |
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature! |
| 21 |
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information. |
| 22 |
end |
Archives