From owner-freebsd-stable Sun Jul 27 18:27:50 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA01869 for stable-outgoing; Sun, 27 Jul 1997 18:27:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au [129.127.96.120]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA01859 for ; Sun, 27 Jul 1997 18:27:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from msmith@localhost) by genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (8.8.5/8.7.3) id KAA02571; Mon, 28 Jul 1997 10:56:51 +0930 (CST) From: Michael Smith Message-Id: <199707280126.KAA02571@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Subject: Re: Linux ELF binaries under FreeBSD 2.2-stable In-Reply-To: <199707272153.RAA21969@eve.umiacs.umd.edu> from "David A. Bader" at "Jul 27, 97 05:53:45 pm" To: dbader@umiacs.umd.edu Date: Mon, 28 Jul 1997 10:56:51 +0930 (CST) Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL28 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk David A. Bader stands accused of saying: > > Does anyone know what the "correct" method for running the Linux > compatibility modules? Currently, I have the "COMPAT_LINUX" option > compiled into my kernel, which was adequate, but I noticed that the > rc.conf option for Linux (which I haven't enabled) loads the > linux_mod.o LKM. Which is the better method? The LKM is "better" in that you don't have to rebuild your kernel to make it work. > David A. Bader, Ph.D. Office: 301-405-6755 -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control. (ph) +61-8-8267-3493 [[ ]] Unix hardware collector. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[