From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Jun 5 10:15:21 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from kcmso1.proxy.att.com (kcmso1.att.com [192.128.133.69]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B65837C46C for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 10:15:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from myevmenkin@att.com) Received: from njb140r1.ems.att.com ([135.65.202.58]) by kcmso1.proxy.att.com (AT&T IPNS/MSO-2.2) with ESMTP id NAA28842 for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 13:15:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from njb140bh3.ems.att.com by njb140r1.ems.att.com (8.8.8+Sun/ATTEMS-1.4.1 sol2) id NAA06557; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 13:14:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: by njb140bh3.ems.att.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 13:15:13 -0400 Message-ID: From: "Yevmenkin, Maksim N, CSCIO" To: "'hackers@freebsd.org'" Subject: RE: kerneld for FreeBSD Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 13:15:12 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="koi8-r" Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG sorry, hit wrong key... :) in addition to my previous message... > > 2) kernel/user space does not unload modules, unless you > > unload it manually > > This is, IMO, a good idea. I certainly don't want some > smartass daemon > unloading a module just because it thinks it should. 8) another option in config file? something like ``do_not_unload''? > > 3) we can not configure which module should be loaded. > > it is hardcoded > > Since the code knows what it wants, this isn't necessarily a > bad thing > either. In most cases, part of the module name is actually > parametric, > eg. in the ifconfig(8) case, so this isn't as much of a problem as it > sounds. i do not agree :-) code wants device driver/interface/filesystem/????. code should not care about module name. of course it is better to have name convension, but i think this is not the case. :-) thanks, emax To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message