Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 12:20:04 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 12:19:54 -0500 Received: from ip252.uni-com.net ([205.198.252.252]:59654 "HELO www.nondot.org") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 12:19:38 -0500 Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 10:49:47 -0600 (CST) From: Chris Lattner To: Rik van Riel Cc: Jamie Lokier , Alexander Viro , "Mohammad A. Haque" , Ben Ford , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, orbit-list@gnome.org, korbit-cvs@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: Linux Kernel ORB: kORBit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > 1. kORBit adds about 150k of code to the 2.4t10 kernel. > > 2. kNFS adds about 100k of code to the 2.4t10 kernel. > So can you implement a kNFS server in kORBit that takes > less than 50kB of RAM? Otherwise it's still a contributor > to bloat and this argument won't work ;) Actually the kORBitNFS server would have to take -50K of code to break even. :) The point was that kORBit lets you do a lot more... so hopefully that 50k of generality gives you something. :) > I guess it's time to stop the flaming and to see what can > be achieved using kORBit. The people who favour kORBit should > IMHO be left alone and given the opportunity to show what can > be achieved with kORBit ... if they don't achieve anything, > the nay-sayers can always claim their "victory"; if something > useful comes out the kORBit people can claim usefulness. Agreed! -Chris http://www.nondot.org/~sabre/os/ http://www.nondot.org/MagicStats/ http://korbit.sourceforge.net/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/