From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sun Oct 12 17:14:21 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id RAA00489
          for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Oct 1997 17:14:21 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers)
Received: from hwcn.org (main.hwcn.org [199.212.94.65])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA00482
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sun, 12 Oct 1997 17:14:16 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from hoek@hwcn.org)
Received: from james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca (ac199@james.hwcn.org [199.212.94.66])
	by hwcn.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA15617;
	Sun, 12 Oct 1997 20:15:00 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (ac199@localhost)
	by james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA16647;
	Sun, 12 Oct 1997 20:15:20 -0400 (EDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca: ac199 owned process doing -bs
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 20:15:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tim Vanderhoek <hoek@hwcn.org>
X-Sender: ac199@james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca
To: Alex <garbanzo@hooked.net>
cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: fnord0: disabled, not probed. 
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971012155131.13795A-100000@zippy.dyn.ml.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.971012200713.14368A-100000@james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, 12 Oct 1997, Alex wrote:

> What changing it to
> 
> #ifdef VERBOSE_PROBES
> printf("fnord0: disabled, not probed.\n");
> #else
> if (bootverbose)
>   printf("fnord0: disabled, not probed.\n");
> #endif
> 
> so that you could get either behavior, depending on your taste?

So people who don't compile their own kernels (ie. the people
affected by jkh's change) get to choose?  :)


--
Outnumbered?  Maybe.  Outspoken?  Never!
tIM...HOEk