| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 23:19:32 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, acme@...radead.org, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>, peterz@...radead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC: perf, tools: Move gtk browser into separate perfgtk executable On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 11:08:57AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > You never replied to the original counter-arguments, such as this one from > Linus: > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/849965 The only thing Linus sais is that it's trivial to generate a subpackage, and that opofile is a desaster. Both of them are 100% correct but at the same time entirely miss the point. Yes, oprofile was and is a desaster, but that has aboslutely nothing to do with where the code lives. And yes, it's easy to generate a subpackage, but you still need all the source tree first. There's a reason why things like X.org got split up (too fine grained in my opinion, but that's another story). As said I very much disagree with having the userspace perf tree in the kernel still, but I've also given up on the fight as I have more important things to do. And as said before it has nothing to do with the issue discussed here right now. -- 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