"Waldemar Kornewald" <Waldemar.Kornewald@xxxxxx> wrote: > That is clear to me and this is the reason why I want to use a static > library that contains all classes. > It, of course, makes changes in the core impossible without > recompiling all > other modules, but as we will be the only ones who develop such > modules it > is no problem. > At least, it will work until we get shared libraries in the kernel. > Then, we > can change the core module (e.g.: eliminate bugs) and all modules > will > profit. Please not - for the small libkernel_ppp.a this might suitable (although I wouldn't do it), but not for a whole networking stack. I certainly don't want to read 10 MB of net stack modules before going online (slight exaggeration). C is really not so bad that I would want to live with the bloat currently introduced by a C++ solution. And for your C++ object passed in C function: there doesn't have to be any case where the other module must access that object, or else the whole approach is kinda senseless. But before I disapprove your solution, it might be better to actually commit it to the repository, so that I can better see what you've done, and where you are aiming at. Adios... Axel.