from the quill of Pixel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on scroll
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> what i'm meaning is that few people uses ide as module. Either they
> don't use it
> or have it builtin the kernel.
Yeah, I would prefer to be able to "leave the baggage behind". I have
an IDE cdrom, but that is it for IDE devices, and for that I like to use
the ide-scsi module. I don't want to have to "pau" for the module in
the kernel if I don't use it.
> but as you're saying, i must be wrong...
Well let's not say right or wrong. You did point out that /proc/ide
seems to be more "complete" when it is compiled in than when it is a
module, and to that I don't disagree. Now with it compiled in I have
the /proc/ide/ide0 that I did not have with IDE as a module. Whether
that is important or not I leave to you. :-)
My preference is for a totally (and I mean totally) stripped kernel with
everything compiled/loaded as modules, via initrd if needed. The beauty
of this approach is one set of kernel objects which you can mix and
match to suit a particular machine via the buiding of machine specific
"initrd"s instead of having to build machine specific kernels. I
believe this was the philosophy behind initrd's development.
b.
--
Brian J. Murrell InterLinx Support Services, Inc.
North Vancouver, B.C. 604 983 UNIX
Platform and Brand Independent UNIX Support - R3.2 - R4 - BSD
