On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 17:25:28 CST, Chris Friesen wrote: > Shailabh Nagar wrote: > > > Sounds like a case is being made to make CONFIG_RCFS a "y" and eliminate > > the possibility of it being a loadable module ? > > No, I believe the idea was to make CONFIG_RCFS be automatically set to > the same as CKRM.
Right, but CONFIG_CKRM is a Y/N, rcfs can be a module which is loaded or not, depending on whether someone actually wants to *use* classes in CKRM. In theory, distros could build with CKRM set to "Y" but leave RCFS as a module to simplify testing. It dosn't matter too much to me but it seems like having the flexibility of leaving rcfs as a module is a nice capability. I'm willing to be hear all comments. ;-) gerrit - 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/
