Re: [coLinux-users] cifsfs/smbfs support?

[George P B. <geo...@gm...>]

Henry Nestler wrote:
> Ryan Underwood wrote:
>   
> After cofs is working, we use cofs to install all the other kernel 
> modules, and nobody has changed the smbfs to module.  I'm not shure, 
> perhaps some peoples with installing a new distri use smbfs for copying 
> files?  Would no risk to break this way.
>
> Is it ok to change it as module?
> What other modules are missed?
> For sample some of NLS?
> We can change something all in the devel version.
>
>   

The main reason for keeping it built-in and not module to this point was
because we didn't have what I'd call an reliable module delivery system
(initrd had problems/issues), with it working better these days, I'd be
more inclined to build-in less, and module more.  However, we still need
to balance size, as we don't want to make coLinux's install so big that
it's difficult to pull down on lower-end connections.  Additionally we
don't want to enable every module for every possible user scenario. 
coLinux is still very much a work in progress, and the last thing we
need to do is add complexities and possible crash-points to the kernel
when we are already working on some tough crashes.

Just my thoughts on the subject.