On Thu, 12 Mar 2015 22:38:10 +0100 Harald Becker <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Natanael, > > I prefer finishing planning and creating a functional complete > structure, before hacking code, so I do not see any benefits, to dig > into your code at the moment, don't see any question that could be > answered this way, at least at the moment. I find it hard to discuss any solutions with someone who don't agree what the problem is. > So my question to this: > > What is the sense of this? > What do you want to express with this? Show with an example the idea a possible way to solve the hotplug forkbomb problem with a minimal long lived netlink listener + short lived event handler. Instead of just using words to tell how to make a, express it with example code. > What was your intention to do that code hacking? To show that a long-lived netlink daemon can be very small and simple - probably much smaller than a fifo manager would be. If someone have a better idea how to solve it, I would love to hear it. (No, I don't fifos will make it smaller/simpler) > I don't expect, you want to show, you are able to do this programing? I'd prefer someone else did it. I did the netlink listener part, and was hoping someone else would implement the mdev -i part, someone that is better on programming than I am. -nc _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
