Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 16:35:48 +0200 From: Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no> To: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: "options" for -current ... Message-ID: <19981001163548.48870@follo.net> In-Reply-To: <199810011215.NAA10795@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>; from Luigi Rizzo on Thu, Oct 01, 1998 at 01:15:25PM %2B0100 References: <199810011215.NAA10795@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Oct 01, 1998 at 01:15:25PM +0100, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > Do i get it right that "config" in -current is different from -stable > in handling "options XYZ" statements ? > > Under -stable, "options XYZ" would bring in files listed in conf/files > as > > filename optional xyz > > wherease in -current it seems not (i.e. i have to add an entry in > conf/options for that ?) I don't think there should be any difference in _that_, but you should _always_ add an entry to conf/options (or a machine-specific variant) if you add new options. You should also add the option to LINT. Eivind. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19981001163548.48870>