Re: /proc/acpi/battery

On 26 Aug 2003 at 14:12, Francisco J. Guidi Moggia wrote:


> Actually, the more adjusted the kernel is to the system, the better
> its configured, if you will not use APM why use uneccessary space,
> in Linux the idea also is not to enable everything hoping something
> will work. But thats a personal issue, what better suits your
> needs. :D
>

Apparently Linus Torvolds and the rest of the kernel maintainers
disagree with you.

They have been struggeling for YEARS to get more things out
of the kernel and into modules because as they know that there
is no measurable advantage in compileing things into the
kernal and it is actually more error prone than having a module that
can be loaded or unloaded as needed.

Now if those guys see that modules are the way to go
who am I to argue and start compiling things into the kernal
and removeing other things unless its necessary.

As for removing it to save space, I suggest that if something as 
small as apm makes any difference then your hard drive it too small
to run linux and you will never succeed.

Further, as to your assertion that the "idea is not to enable 
everything hoping something will work"  perhaps you should look
into the extraordinary lengths the linux community has gone to
in the area of hardware detection to allow PRECISELY THAT.

The fact that some distros, SuSE for one, can automatically
detect apci capable machines and deliberatly NOT load apm
from the init scripts says that this approach is correct.

-- 
______________________________________
John Andersen
NORCOM / Juneau, Alaska
http://www.screenio.com/
(907) 790-3386

._______________________________________
John S. Andersen
NORCOM  mailto:[email protected]
Juneau, Alaska
http://www.screenio.com/