From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Mon Aug 13 16:30:08 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F139107717D for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 16:30:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (br1.CN84in.dnsmgr.net [69.59.192.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 915A280C29; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 16:30:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id w7DGSwA5037858; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 09:28:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd-rwg@localhost) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id w7DGSvOm037857; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 09:28:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <201808131628.w7DGSvOm037857@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: kernel build failure In-Reply-To: To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Trond_Endrest=F8l?= Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2018 09:28:57 -0700 (PDT) CC: Matthew Macy , Michael Butler , freebsd-current X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL121h (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2018 16:30:08 -0000 > On Sun, 12 Aug 2018 14:39-0700, Matthew Macy wrote: > > > Sorry guys, last time I touched ZFS I tried to push to make it an option to > > statically link and was actually told that it wasn't something anyone else > > wanted. The issue comes from ZFS not being in NOTES and thus not in LINT. > > If consensus is that "options ZFS" is no longer valid, then maybe > UPDATING should reflect the fact. > > I can live with loading zfs.ko and opensolaris.ko at boot time, but I > think this is a step backwards. Please no, I can think of no sound reason that you should be forced to use modules. -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org