[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Cosmetic JFFS patch.

To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxx.com>
Subject: Re: Cosmetic JFFS patch.
From: Christoph Zens <czens@xxxxxxx.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:17:15 -0700 (PDT)
cc: chuckw@xxxxxxx.net, Aaron Lehmann <aaronl@xxxxxxx.com>, Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxx.uk>, Vipin Malik <vipin.malik@xxxxxxx.com>, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxx.org>, jffs-dev@xxxxxxx.com, linux-kernel@xxxxxxx.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0106281057170.15199-100000@xxxxxxx.com>
Sender: owner-jffs-dev@xxxxxxx.com


> Also, in printk's, you waste run-time memory, and you bloat up the need
> for the log size. Both of which are _technical_ reasons not to do it.
> 
> Small is beuatiful.

I totally agree. If you want to use Linux for a small and low cost
embedded system, you can't afford loads of RAM and FLASH space.
Small is the _key_ for those systems.

> 
> 		Linus
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe jffs-dev" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxx.com
> 

-- 
Christoph Zens
czens@xxxxxxx.com
(415)-289-7765


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe jffs-dev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxx.com

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Cosmetic JFFS patch.
  - From: Daniel Stone <daniel@xxxxxxx.net>

References:
- Re: Cosmetic JFFS patch.
  - From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxx.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Cosmetic JFFS patch.
Next by Date: Re: Cosmetic JFFS patch.
Prev by thread: Re: Cosmetic JFFS patch.
Next by thread: Re: Cosmetic JFFS patch.
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread