Re: [2.6 patch] make UNIX a bool

Adrian Bunk wrote:

CONFIG_UNIX=m doesn't make much sense.


Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>

Why? You can build unix domain sockets as a loadable module and

it runs fine (or it did last I tried). Whether that makes sense from a distribution point of

view, because everybody wants it, is another story.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [2.6 patch] make UNIX a bool
    • From: Diego Calleja <[email protected]>
  • Re: [2.6 patch] make UNIX a bool
    • From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [2.6 patch] make UNIX a bool
    • From: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: creating live virtual files by concatenation
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] Define wc_wmb, a write barrier for PCI write combining
• Previous by thread: [2.6 patch] make UNIX a bool
• Next by thread: Re: [2.6 patch] make UNIX a bool
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]