Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org-S932183AbVJHWmX@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932183AbVJHWmX (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Sat, 8 Oct 2005 18:42:23 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932185AbVJHWmX
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Sat, 8 Oct 2005 18:42:23 -0400
Received: from free.hands.com ([83.142.228.128]:32675 "EHLO free.hands.com")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932183AbVJHWmX (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 8 Oct 2005 18:42:23 -0400
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 23:42:03 +0100
From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl@lkcl.net>
To: Helge Hafting <helgehaf@aitel.hist.no>
Cc: Michael Concannon <mike@concannon.net>,
       Chase Venters <chase.venters@clientec.com>,
       Marc Perkel <marc@perkel.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       Linux Visionaries Mailing List <lvml@lists.blackwhale.net>
Subject: Re: what's next for the linux kernel?
Message-ID: <20051008224203.GD18797@lkcl.net>
References: <20051002204703.GG6290@lkcl.net> <200510041840.55820.chase.venters@clientec.com> <20051005102650.GO10538@lkcl.net> <200510060005.09121.chase.venters@clientec.com> <43453E7F.5030801@concannon.net> <20051006192857.GV10538@lkcl.net> <4345855B.3@concannon.net> <20051006212001.GZ10538@lkcl.net> <20051008222709.GA30627@aitel.hist.no>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20051008222709.GA30627@aitel.hist.no>
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: 1660
Lines: 41

helge, yours is the kind of comment which is welcome on linux visionaries and
i wish, i wissshhh, for the thread on lkml with this subject to DIEEEE.

l.

On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 12:27:09AM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 10:20:01PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 04:13:15PM -0400, Michael Concannon wrote:
> > 
> > > 1. It _is_ a file: registry.dat
> > > 2. It is a binary file at that...
> > > 3. That file has become a dumping ground for everything that every app 
> > > thinks is "important" and of course every app writer thinks everything 
> > > they write is the most important thing ever - I am sure a have never 
> > > done such a thing :-)
> >  
> >  s/"that file"/"openldap" and substitute "every app writer"
> >  for "every major free software developer we respect greatly which
> >  can store its data and/or configuration details in an LDAP database"
> >  and your evident distaste for "that file" looks a little like religious
> >  zealotry.
> > 
> Well, there are many differences between the windows registry and 
> openldap on unix.  First, openldap is voluntary.  There are plenty
> of linux systems not using ldap at all, and still using whatever apps
> they want. People deploy ldap when they think the benefits outweighs
> the added complexity. :-)
> 
> Helge Hafting 
> 
> 

-- 
--
<a href="http://lkcl.net">http://lkcl.net</a>
--
-
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/