From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 13 Jul 2002 09:50:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 13 Jul 2002 09:50:19 -0400 Received: from johnsl.lnk.telstra.net ([139.130.12.152]:9225 "EHLO ns.higherplane.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 13 Jul 2002 09:50:17 -0400 Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 23:56:02 +1000 From: john slee To: Daniel Phillips Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: bzip2 support against 2.4.18 Message-ID: <20020713135602.GK7579@higherplane.net> References: <003d01c22819$ba1818b0$1c6fa8c0@hyper> <000901c2296e$7cab2ed0$1c6fa8c0@hyper> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 09:30:29AM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote: > Actually, what is the use of even including 'bz2' in the name? Nobody > besides we geeks needs to know the thing is compressed with bzip2. It > would be nice to see the word 'linux' in there. How about bzlinux? > Just think of the hundreds of cases of carpal tunnel syndrome you'd > prevent by eliminating the shifted character. why not just call it 'linux'? file(1) exists for a reason, and the 'vm' prefix is a bit redundant these days also i've never really understood why the binary format of the kernel is selected via make. why not just make it a regular kernel option with a sane default? surely your average kernel compiling person picks something that works (zImage? bzImage? Image?) and sticks to it... j. -- toyota power: http://indigoid.net/