Karsten Baumgarten wrote: > I can't see why this would make things tidier. In general compiling > stuff as a module is useful if you want or need to have different system > setups without the need to switch kernels (like one kernel supports > wifi, the other one doesn't). Otherwise, assuming your hardware doesn't > change frequently, compiling *everything* as a module won't make too > much sense (IMHO).
Well my hardware isn't too changeable, but it does change. One thing is I don't like the idea of all the guesswork I've done when I set up my kernel. Although it's just my own sense of cleanliness, but I would rather have modules compiled that I don't use, than stuff compiled into the kernel that I don't need. The other reason is that I like the idea of a flexible kernel... IMO hotplug is one of the coolest things to happen to linux recently, and I like the idea of it no longer being *my* problem to work out which bits of the kernel I need and don't need. You might think of it as kind of a test to see just how much hardware stuff I can make linux set up *for* me. > | What do people think? Does it seem like a good idea? Or is it just > | immensely stupid? > > I vote for the latter. :D Hehehe :-) Ah well, as long as I don't break my 2.6.9 bootup I can mess around... If I get bored with it I'll just go back to my current setup :-) Tom -- [email protected] mailing list
