On Thursday 20 September 2007 4:22:37 pm Jared Hulbert wrote: > > > I think that this idea is not worth it. > > Don't use the config option then.... > > > My problem is that switching off printk is the single biggest bloat > > cutter in the kernel, yet it makes the resulting system very hard to > > support. It combines a big upside with a big downside, and I'd like > > something in between. > > It's not such a big downside IMHO. You can support a kernel without > printk. Need to debug the kernel without printk? Use a JTAG > debugger...
I don't actually own a jtag. (I do use qemu's gdb support to debug the target kernel, but it's darn awkward and has limited hardware support.) > If you have a system that actually configures out printk's, chances > are you don't have storage and output mechanisms to do much with the > messages anyway. Think embedded _products_ here. I plead the fifth. > Sure the > development boards have serial, ethernet, and all that jazz but tens > of millions of ARM based gadgets don't. I wonder if that "Monsoon" gadget does? (Sorry, just on my mind today...) Rob -- "One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code." - Ken Thompson. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
