[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  "Mitch \(WebCob\)" <mitch at webcob dot com>
 To:  "'Jean Everson Martina'" <everson at inf dot ufsc dot br>, "'Dinesh Nair'" <dinesh at alphaque dot com>
 Cc:  m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  RE: [m0n0wall] Full PC m0n0 - was Re: [m0n0wall] Captive with IMAP
 Date:  Mon, 18 Oct 2004 10:16:38 -0700
OH YEAH ! ;-)

> this aproach has a little problem, the memory filesystem is fixed size,
> so you could not have as many modules your CF could contain, the
> limiting factor is the memory size. Keeping mfs large can make
> m0n0(original distro) have problems with SBC systems with just 64 MB of
> RAM (soekris and wrap boards).
> The hooks in rc.bootup can be easily implemented assuming that
> config.xml has already been parsed, so in the config.xml can be stored
> information about the modules, the mounting place, etc, even the module
> configuration itself.
> The web gui was what I was planning too. But as I said, I will not start
> until knowing the importance and the guidelines on how to do this from
> the m0n0wall project leaders.

[Mitch (bitblock)] There is already a module or patch from Fred I think that
handles expanding the image support - would this solve your problem?

Manuel is cautious about adding stuff to the core (not speaking for him
officially - just my observances), which is imho a "GOOD THING" and which is
why we got modules in the first place... If the existing mod supplies what
you need in terms of more workspace, then your changes could work. Those two
small changes could allow people to add modules without a command line,
which in my opinion would be VERY worthy additions to the core - then we
wouldn't need any more - ever ;-)

It might be easier to do it and show results, then lobby for inclusion
rather than to hold all development pending a commitment from Manuel - in
his position I wouldn't want to make promises until reviewing the final code
;-)

I hope you do it!

m/