On 11/24/11 17:46, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2011-11-24, Paul Irofti<p...@irofti.net> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 10:09:31AM +0000, Julien Crapovich wrote:
Hello.
Absolutely, but compiling without INET6 is not supposed to generate error.
I've just disabled INET6 on GENERIC file, not other hack.
This is indeed a bug. Other people should stop bashing.
Yes, of course, but I think that bugs which are only seen when
people do things we tell them not to do should generally be a low
priority for developers.
If somebody needs this to work it's usually not going to take them
long to put ifdefs in the right place and send a diff, if they aren't
prepared to do this, I really think they should stick to a generic
kernel.
I'm curious as to why this is needed at all. I've not bothered to look,
but I can't see that INET6 takes that much kernel space. Unless a
a 486 is being used, isn't this a false optimization?
A long time ago I used to make SHRIMP kernels which had everything
I didn't need stripped out. Likely it saved 1.5M. I used that till I had
a horrible time switching laptops--I'd stripped out what I needed and
didn't figure it out for hours. That complete waste taught me that it
wasn't worth it.
--STeve Andre'
