From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 6 May 2002 14:42:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 6 May 2002 14:42:24 -0400 Received: from hoemail1.lucent.com ([192.11.226.161]:11219 "EHLO hoemail1.firewall.lucent.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 6 May 2002 14:42:24 -0400 From: John Stoffel MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15574.52864.321544.44124@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 14:42:08 -0400 To: Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk Cc: Dan Kegel , "David S. Miller" , , Subject: Re: Tux in main kernel tree? (was khttpd rotten?) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 6.95 under Emacs 20.6.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Roy> Perhaps it's about time to talk about pulling Tux into the main Roy> kernel tree, as khttpd once again has proved ususable. And why does a Web server belong in the kernel? I've never understood this, and I personally do not think it has any need to be there. Or maybe we should include kDNS and kftpd as well now? An httpd server is a *user space* issue, not a kernel issue. John John Stoffel - Senior Unix Systems Administrator - Lucent Technologies stoffel@lucent.com - http://www.lucent.com - 978-399-0479