Philip Blundell writes:
> My gripe about kecardd is just that it seems somewhat over-engineered and it
> increases the memory footprint to no purpose on 26-bit machines. Perhaps
> the solution is to create a cut-down version of the podule support for those
> systems though, then you could remove a lot of the #ifdefs in ecard.c.
I'm beginning to wonder if you really have looked at the code at this point.
You mention the #ifdefs, but if you notice what they do, they do do exactly
what you say - produce a cut down ecard.c.
Since kcardd only went in last week, I haven't finished optimising it for
the older machines, and indeed it won't be there for the older machines
once I've finished it.
Anyway, I didn't think that 2.2 was able to run on the old machines with only
4MB any more.
_____
|_____| ------------------------------------------------- ---+---+-
| | Russell King [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- ---
| | | | http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/~rmk/armlinux.html / / |
| +-+-+ --- -+-
/ | THE developer of ARM Linux |+| /|\
/ | | | --- |
+-+-+ ------------------------------------------------- /\\\ |
unsubscribe: body of `unsubscribe linux-arm' to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
