From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Dec 10 15:56:15 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74FFA16A403 for ; Sun, 10 Dec 2006 15:56:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@dfwlp.com) Received: from regulus.dfwlp.com (rrcs-64-183-212-244.sw.biz.rr.com [64.183.212.244]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31BF143CB2 for ; Sun, 10 Dec 2006 15:55:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd@dfwlp.com) Received: from athena.dfwlp.com (athena.dfwlp.com [192.168.125.83]) (authenticated bits=0) by regulus.dfwlp.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id kBAFuCU4004128 for ; Sun, 10 Dec 2006 09:56:12 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from freebsd@dfwlp.com) From: Jonathan Horne To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2006 09:56:12 -0600 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.4 References: <200612100905.30430.kirk@strauser.com> <200612100919.59564.lane@joeandlane.com> In-Reply-To: <200612100919.59564.lane@joeandlane.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200612100956.12327.freebsd@dfwlp.com> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=3.6 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=ham version=3.1.7 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7 (2006-10-05) on regulus.dfwlp.com Subject: Re: Advantages of trimmed kernel? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2006 15:56:15 -0000 On Sunday 10 December 2006 09:19, Lane wrote: > Suppose that as a stop-gap measure you pull > an old isa nic from out of the closet, install it, and then boot the > server ... only to realize that your nic is not supported by the kernel > that you dutifully trimmed. > > I think it is especially important to keep the kernel as flexible as > possible, since you may have to install the OS on any given machine without > the luxury of recompiling. lane, i think thats a really good way to look at it. flexibility can truly be a key of utmost importance when it comes to disaster recovery. cheers, jonathan