[openbeosnetteam] Re: moving ppp to other location

> > > 1) the shared PPP code should not be called/considered a shared
> > > library, as our kernel don't and most probably won't support kernel
> > > land shared libraries soon, not by R1 but maybe even not by R2...
> > Too bad. :(
> > Maybe I will have to sit down on my own...but I already planned some
> > experiments with file/data management after having finished PPP.
> > Why is it so difficult to add shared library support? Cannot we add a
> > directory /beos/system/kernellibs where all kernel-only libraries are
> > located? Why cannot the userland code be reused for the kernel
> > modules?
>
> Just deal with it - you knew it before, or at least we tried to tell
> you.
> It might come in R2, but certainly not in R1.

Could you please tell me what would need to be done?

> Huh? A .a will *never* end up in /system/libs - if it's a public .a, it
> would belong to develop/libs/<arch>/

Yes, in a later mail I wrote that this would be the perfect place for R2/R3
and you replied to it. ;)

> > I will have to do something against the huge binary size. >200K is
> > too much.
> > Should the List template be replaced with a BList-like base class for
> > void
> > pointers and a SimplePointerList that just wraps all BList methods to
> > typed
> > methods? It could be added to "kernel/util". This could probably
> > reduce the
> > size to around 120-130K, I think (and hope). But this will be done at
> > some
>
> How does your list implementation look like when it is that big?
> Anyway, the large file sizes are something you accepted when going the
> "I want a shared library" approach.

It is Ingo's List template. I do not think the Vector template is smaller.

Waldemar

Other related posts: