From owner-freebsd-stable Sun Apr 23 13:23:38 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mass.cdrom.com (adsl-63-202-179-64.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.202.179.64]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 215CB37B9B9; Sun, 23 Apr 2000 13:23:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from msmith@mass.cdrom.com) Received: from mass.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mass.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA51633; Sun, 23 Apr 2000 13:30:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from msmith@mass.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <200004232030.NAA51633@mass.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 To: Matthew Dillon Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Linux emulation scripting fix to be committed to 5.x and 4.x wednesday In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 23 Apr 2000 11:55:08 PDT." <200004231855.LAA63309@apollo.backplane.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 13:30:39 -0700 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I wonder if it makes sense to add a release id to the module header > and have the module loader refuse (unless forced) to load modules that > are out-of-date with the kernel? We actually have a whole module dependancy and versioning system more or less ready to go into -current. It could have gone in for 4.0, but we wouldn't have had time to test it. I would avoid rolling anything half-assed at this point in time. BTW; whilst I think Poul was entirely the wrong person to raise the issue, I agree that you probably want to hang back on MFCing the linux scripting changes for a week or so. This is really just common sense. -- \\ Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. \\ Mike Smith \\ Tell him he should learn how to fish himself, \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ and he'll hate you for a lifetime. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message