[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200709201753.10542.rob@landley.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 17:53:10 -0500
From: Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
To: "Jared Hulbert" <jaredeh@...il.com>
Cc: "Alexey Dobriyan" <adobriyan@...il.com>, linux-tiny@...enic.com,
"Tim Bird" <tim.bird@...sony.com>,
"linux kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"CE Linux Developers List" <celinux-dev@...e.celinuxforum.org>,
"Michael Opdenacker" <michael@...e-electrons.com>
Subject: Re: [Announce] Linux-tiny project revival
On Thursday 20 September 2007 4:22:37 pm Jared Hulbert wrote:
> > > I think that this idea is not worth it.
>
> Don't use the config option then....
>
> > My problem is that switching off printk is the single biggest bloat
> > cutter in the kernel, yet it makes the resulting system very hard to
> > support. It combines a big upside with a big downside, and I'd like
> > something in between.
>
> It's not such a big downside IMHO. You can support a kernel without
> printk. Need to debug the kernel without printk? Use a JTAG
> debugger...
I don't actually own a jtag. (I do use qemu's gdb support to debug the target
kernel, but it's darn awkward and has limited hardware support.)
> If you have a system that actually configures out printk's, chances
> are you don't have storage and output mechanisms to do much with the
> messages anyway. Think embedded _products_ here.
I plead the fifth.
> Sure the
> development boards have serial, ethernet, and all that jazz but tens
> of millions of ARM based gadgets don't.
I wonder if that "Monsoon" gadget does? (Sorry, just on my mind today...)
Rob
--
"One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code."
- Ken Thompson.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists