On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 12:35:20AM -0500, Andrew Brown wrote:
> it's a really cool idea, but i have a couple things i want to say.
> i've elided your post simply because they don't pertain to any
> particular piece of it, but (i think) to the idea as a whole.
> 
> (1) don't we kinda need an "in-kernel linker" for this to work
> properly?  or at least more smoothly?

Yes.  That's the next step.

We have to start somewhere, though.  Designing the in-kernel linker
will have consequences on how modules are built and linked.  My
proposal (which is only a patch against config(8)) deal with _what_
the modules are.

> (2) lkms are currently rather broken wrt certain configurations or
> features.  sysctl, for one, which i was well into fixing before i

Yes, they are.  But they work well enough in some situations to at
least start that way.

Quentin Garnier.