Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 17:01:41 +1000 From: Murray Taylor <murraytaylor@bytecraftsystems.com> To: conrads@cox.net Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "Next Generation" kernel configuration? Message-ID: <1090393301.2180.77.camel@wstaylorm.dand06.au.bytecraft.au.com> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20040720205341.conrads@cox.net> References: <XFMail.20040720205341.conrads@cox.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 2004-07-21 at 11:53, Conrad J. Sabatier wrote: > On 21-Jul-2004 Max Laier wrote: > > On Wednesday 21 July 2004 03:03, Brooks Davis wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 07:39:31PM -0500, Conrad J. Sabatier wrote: > [snip] > >> > A dependable tool offering a menu-driven means of configuring the > >> > kernel, ensuring proper config file syntax, dependency handling, > >> > prevention of incompatible options, etc. -- as well as online > >> > documentation, advice, suggestions and warnings, plus perhaps a > >> > nice set of default selections -- would be a very nice addition to > >> > the system. But to bring it about, obviously a major reworking of > >> > the current system of kernel configuration files would be required. > >> > >> You can have my simple flat file kernel config when you pry it from > >> my cold, dead hands and I know a number of other develoeprs share > >> this viewpoint. All my experiences with the linux visual kernel > >> config tool have been annoying and I've got friends with more > >> expierence with it that have much less kind things to say. > > > > Add me to the list. And this realates to sys/conf/* as well > > (respondig to the re-reply). Especially developers prefer *clean*, > > *simple* config files and I (personally) would really really hate to > > twiddle with some insane XML just to add something to the build! > > Oh, agreed, definitely. Wasn't even thinking XML (yuck!). :-) > > Basically, I'm just thinking of a layout which, in the simplest, > cleanest manner possible, would allow a "make config"-like tool to > extract the information it needed, so options could be presented to > the user along with their descriptions, if so desired. I don't have a > clear-cut idea just yet of how this might be done, to be honest. :-) > > >> That said, so long as it doesn't impose too much developer burden, > >> an improved set of backend files that did a better job of handling > >> dependencies and knew which options where relevent given the > >> configured set of devices could be useful. > > > > http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.3R/todo.html has a "Desired > > features"-item saying: "Revised kld build infrastructure", which > > will pretty much interfere with this. You might want to contact with > > the current owner (peter@) and hear what he has to say. > > Thanks for the pointer. I'll check into that. > > > Other than that, I'd welcome a somewhat enriched config > > environment as long as it is done reasonable and makes the job > > easier! And please: NO XML! > > Cool. And not to worry. No XML. :-) > > >> There is a valid question of what a depenency means. For instance, > >> you can't really have IP networking without lo(4) (there's a null > >> pointer derefrence if you try), but since you can load it as a > >> module, should you have to compile it in? > > > > There should be levels of dependencies ... i.e. the TBD config-tool > > would (strongly) suggest that you build-in lo(4) into an "options > > INET" kernel, but should not stop you to do else. > > Exactly. That's the sort of thing I had in mind. > > I realize this is a fairly large undertaking, and hearing that others > have already made attempts but have yet to produce anything makes me a > little uncertain about it all, but I do think it's something worth > exploring. And it'll keep me off the streets and out of trouble for a > good while, too. :-) > > If I manage to come up with anything reasonable, you'll hear about it > here. As an initial starting point for 'preloading' any menubased kernel configurator, could the file /var/run/dmesg.boot be usefully parsed as a list of 'this is what is actually installed in this box, what else do you want to add?" Of course any output developed on a run of the configurator would/could/should be scanned as well to include answers to the question.."What did I include last time?" 0.02c -- Murray Taylor Special Projects Engineer --------------------------------- Bytecraft Systems & Entertainment P: +61 3 8710 2555 F: +61 3 8710 2599 D: +61 3 9238 4275 M: +61 417 319 256 E: murraytaylor@bytecraftsystems.com or visit us on the web http://www.bytecraftsystems.com http://www.bytecraftentertainment.com --------------------------------------------------------------- The information transmitted in this e-mail is for the exclusive use of the intended addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of it, or the taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons and/or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please inform the sender and/or addressee immediately and delete the material. E-mails may not be secure, may contain computer viruses and may be corrupted in transmission. Please carefully check this e-mail (and any attachment) accordingly. No warranties are given and no liability is accepted for any loss or damage caused by such matters. --------------------------------------------------------------- **************************************************************** This Email has been scanned for Viruses by MailMarshal. ****************************************************************
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1090393301.2180.77.camel>