Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 19:00:57 -0500 From: Juli Mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.org> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: policy on GPL'd drivers? Message-ID: <20030528190057.A98180@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20030528.175747.85411483.imp@bsdimp.com>; from imp@bsdimp.com on Wed, May 28, 2003 at 05:57:47PM -0600 References: <20030528.031403.32720860.imp@bsdimp.com> <200305290917.44200.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <20030528185407.A97781@FreeBSD.org> <20030528.175747.85411483.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> [ Date: 2003-05-28 ] [ w.r.t. Re: policy on GPL'd drivers? ] > In message: <20030528185407.A97781@FreeBSD.org> > Juli Mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.ORG> writes: > : Jumping in a bit late as I thought someone would point this out, but > : I thought that 3rd-party modules would live in /boot/modules? > > third party binary only modules. If you have source, for some > definition of having source, to rebuild from, then it makes the most > sense to keep it directly with the kernel. I'd not bother with > symlinks as that just makes things more complicated and I'm not sure > what gain you get from it. I'm just curious how the third-party modules are kept around properly across installkernel/buildkernel. Did you get MAKEOBJDIR/MAKEOBJDIRPREFIX stuff working in the kernel build dir with ports modules? I'm glad we aren't doing the realpath(3) thing in Make anymore, if so, as I doubt I'm the only one with one hell of a convoluted setup in that sort of thing. And thanks for clearing up that that was binary-only ones, that makes a bit more sense I suppose, assuming we're handling the module installs all properly. Thanx, juli. -- juli mallett. email: jmallett@freebsd.org; efnet: juli;
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030528190057.A98180>