On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Peter Samuelson wrote: > > Now we only need to convince Peter. > > I just sent you a patch with all [M], so I guess you can consider me > sufficiently convinced. I'm not, really, but it's hardly an important > issue, so I figured I'd stop wasting all of our time. Besides, I am > outnumbered 2-1. (:
Okay, as you're not seriously mad, I consider you convinced ;) > I think the world would have been better off if 5 years ago we had > decided to come up with a new suffix (say ".ko") for kernel modules. > Sure they are object files, but they are *more* than that. (And some > day we may want to use ... who knows? shared libraries?) The biggest > advantage would have been avoiding crap like "sr_mod.o" in favor of the > much saner "sr.ko".... > > As a side effect, this would have made the present issue go away, > because there would be no need for the additional information: .ko == > final module, .o == not final module. > > At this point I suspect it is about 5 years too late to propose my .ko > change. Too much user confusion. Too bad. May actually still happen together with Rusty's new module stuff, though I'm not sure if that's 2.5 or 2.7 material... --Kai ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size! http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0001en _______________________________________________ kbuild-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kbuild-devel
