Are you offering an easy fix for that "Linux" line on your SBOM?

edelbitter 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I found that reducing my "Linux" lines from ~21000 (including net-pf-16-proto-21) down to those ~3000 I might actually use (e.g. udp_tunnel) to be a fairly effective method of not having to care about each and every newly discovered memory safety hazard.

▲

abirch 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I remember my earlier days of Linux of having to compile a kernel module to read from cdrom. Seems like Linux has gone too far in the other direction of having modules that you will probably never need.

▲

tremon 2 hours ago | parent [-]

That's the same thing that people say about MS Office: nobody uses more than 15% of its feature set, but everyone uses a different 15%. "Linux" having these modules is what keeps it relevant and prevalent in different fields and niches. Whether distro's should ship this many modules by default is a different question, but then we're no longer talking about Linux the kernel.

	▲	edelbitter 30 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Not just shipping features - that part is little more than disk space, for features already neatly isolated into modules. I see potential in improved tooling to express "do not autoload anything below this tree" in a more reliable and manageable manner. I know my 15% (far below that, actually), and many more users could express theirs in some deploy config.. If only that did not incur the cost of watching upstream changing things for no reason, or for the recurring reason of kconfig being a fairly error-prone method of expressing & validating dependency trees.

▲

tptacek 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

No, I'm making an aesthetic critique of a promotional blog post, as an author of commercial technical blog posts myself.