Re: obsolete code must die

["richard" <richard.reynolds@usa.net>]

Ok here are my only 2cents, I use some of this hardware that this clean up
would kill, I dont like that thought, and my brand spanking new 1.2ghz
athalon has a single ISA slot and on board parallel / serial ports all of
which are in use so maybee those should be kept, I however I do agree that a
smaller kernal would be nice, could some of these older hardware devices be
kept out of the kernal? I dont have a clue, I agree on most aspects of why
this cleanup should take place, but to what extent? is it an option to take
some of this out of the kernal and still support it? maybee in userspace?
dont have a clue. but lets not kill everything in this list.


thanks for listening and any feedback
Richard Reynolds
Richard.Reynolds@usa.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jesse Pollard" <pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil>
To: <jaswinder.singh@3disystems.com>; "Daniel" <ddickman@nyc.rr.com>; "Linux
kernel" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: "Jaswinder Singh" <jaswinder.singh@3disystems.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 7:01 AM
Subject: Re: obsolete code must die


> ---------  Received message begins Here  ---------
>
> >
> > Cleanup is a nice idea , but Linux should support old hardware and
should
> > not affect them in any way.
> >
> > Jaswinder.
>
> I agree - and added my comments below.
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Daniel" <ddickman@nyc.rr.com>
> > To: "Linux kernel" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 5:44 PM
> > Subject: obsolete code must die
> >
> >
> > > Anyone concerned about the current size of the kernel source code? I
am,
> > and
> > > I propose to start cleaning house on the x86 platform. I mean it's all
> > very
> > > well and good to keep adding features, but stuff needs to go if kernel
> > > development is to move forward. Before listing the gunk I want to get
rid
> > > of, here's my justification for doing so:
> > > -- Getting rid of old code can help simplify the kernel. This means
less
> > > chance of bugs.
> > > -- Simplifying the kernel means that it will be easier for newbies to
> > > understand and perhaps contribute.
> > > -- a simpler, cleaner kernel will also be of more use in an academic
> > > environment.
> > > -- a smaller kernel is easier to maintain and is easier to
re-architect
> > > should the need arise.
> > > -- If someone really needs support for this junk, they will always
have
> > the
> > > option of using the 2.0.x, 2.2.x or 2.4.x series.
> > >
> > > So without further ado here're the features I want to get rid of:
> > >
> > > i386, i486
> > > The Pentium processor has been around since 1995. Support for these
older
> > > processors should go so we can focus on optimizations for the pentium
and
> > > better processors.
>
> I'm still using 486 systems.... Works fine for a DSL firewall. Why change
it?
> I'd have to buy a whole new system. The case won't hold anything newer -
so
> it costs $600-$800; I'd rather put that into fixing up the house... or
getting
> a newer workstation (1.4 GHz looks REALLY nice). I don't need high
performance
> for a firewall that only handles ~700Kbits/sec over a 10 base T network.
>
> I also understand that 386 systems make excellent terminal servers...
>
> > > math-emu
> > > If support for i386 and i486 is going away, then so should math
emulation.
> > > Every intel processor since the 486DX has an FPU unit built in. In
fact
> > > shouldn't FPU support be a userspace responsibility anyway?
>
> Not when the code must support register save/restore on context switches.
> Now the meat of the emulator perhaps. But then you must also provide a
> way for applications that don't know about the lack to suddenly have
access
> to a new library, accessed via a kernel trap (illegal instruction). This
> imposes more context switches on an already slow system (though why
anywone
> would use floating point on one is beyond me ... maybe performance
tracking
> of firewall/terminal server use...).
>
> > > ISA bus, MCA bus, EISA bus
> > > PCI is the defacto standard. Get rid of CONFIG_BLK_DEV_ISAPNP,
> > > CONFIG_ISAPNP, etc
> > >
> > > ISA, MCA, EISA device drivers
> > > If support for the buses is gone, there's no point in supporting
devices
> > for
> > > these buses.
>
> Not on the 386/486 systems (at least the ISA/EISA based ones).
>
> > > all code marked as CONFIG_OBSOLETE
> > > Since we're cleaning house we may as well get rid of this stuff.
> > >
> > > MFM/RLL/XT/ESDI hard drive support
> > > Does anyone still *have* an RLL drive that works? At the very least
get
> > rid
> > > of the old driver (eg CONFIG_BLK_DEV_HD_ONLY, CONFIG_BLK_DEV_HD_IDE,
> > > CONFIG_BLK_DEV_XD, CONFIG_BLK_DEV_PS2)
> > >
> > > parallel/serial/game ports
> > > More controversial to remove this, since they are *still* in pretty
wide
> > > use -- but USB and IEEE 1394 are the way to go. No ifs ands or buts.
>
> really? I'm still running my printer this way (and just bought a parallel
> printer/copier/scanner - the USB port isn't finished yet). And one of my
> serial mice. Not to mention the plan to add the UPS to the serial
lines....
> It's still cheaper to use existing serial ports than to buy 4 serial ports
> for USB. USB doesn't buy me any performance advantage (yet).
>
> > > a.out
> > > Who needs it anymore. I love ELF.
> > >
> > > I really think doing a clean up is worthwhile. Maybe while looking for
> > stuff
> > > to clean up we'll even be able to better comment the existing code.
Any
> > > other features people would like to get rid of? Any comments or
> > suggestions?
> > > I'd love to start a good discussion about this going so please send me
> > your
> > > 2 cents.
> > >
> > > Daniel
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Jesse I Pollard, II
> Email: pollard@navo.hpc.mil
>
> Any opinions expressed are solely my own.
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
>
>