Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751313AbVJFTPt (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Oct 2005 15:15:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751315AbVJFTPt (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Oct 2005 15:15:49 -0400 Received: from free.hands.com ([83.142.228.128]:14547 "EHLO free.hands.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751313AbVJFTPs (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Oct 2005 15:15:48 -0400 Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 20:15:22 +0100 From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton To: Diego Calleja Cc: chase.venters@clientec.com, marc@perkel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: what's next for the linux kernel? Message-ID: <20051006191522.GS10538@lkcl.net> References: <20051002204703.GG6290@lkcl.net> <4342DC4D.8090908@perkel.com> <200510041840.55820.chase.venters@clientec.com> <20051005102650.GO10538@lkcl.net> <20051005130410.ddae71b3.diegocg@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051005130410.ddae71b3.diegocg@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-hands-com-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: lkcl@lkcl.net Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1981 Lines: 54 On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 01:04:10PM +0200, Diego Calleja wrote: > El Wed, 5 Oct 2005 11:26:50 +0100, > Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton escribi?: > > > > Now I certainly wouldn't advocate a Windows-style registry, > > > because I think it's full of obvious problems. > > > > such as? :) > > > The ugly implementation (inside the kernel and as a big file instead of doing it as a the nt 3.51 implementation got it right: userspace service (MSRPC service) with LPC (this is NT, based on Mach, so they have LPC which is message-passing - joy) communicating from userspace to kernelspace where necessary. nooo, it not okay to have registry in kernel. _access_ to it (via ioctl's) yes. _in_ kernel, friggin'ell'no. regarding the other points: yes, there's a per-user hive key, which is "overlaid" onto parts of the sub-tree. and yes, the previous poster is absolutely right: the benefits cannot be felt unless evvverrryyy service under the sun is also using it. ... but heck - we do configuration of pretty much every major service under the sun out of ldap, don't we? and openldap itself just got the ability to read its own config out of its own database, right? it's not _that_ far off, not _that_ unachievable, s/ldap/registry. there's just a few core services missing - initscripts is a good example - which nobody's yet had the nerve to tackle (afaik) and dump into LDAP. in that example, mostly because there's not much point unless you're also going to do something decent like put in proper dependencies (see depinit). anyway. how on _earth_ did we get here, and please could someone advise me - and everyone else - of a more suitable location to discuss these matters? l. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/