Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 09:32:27 -0700 From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@cup.hp.com> To: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Multiple kernels / module search path Message-ID: <3974869B.22E7924@cup.hp.com> References: <49681.963925937@axl.ops.uunet.co.za>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sheldon Hearn wrote:
>
> On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 22:09:44 MST, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>
> > Question 3: Should we change the order in which modules are searched to
> > /modules{.NAME}:/boot:/, where {.NAME} denotes the optional name suffix.
>
> I really don't think that this is the way to go. A module should be a
> module should be a module. That's certainly where we're headed, right?
Building the modules as part of the kernel seems like a step away from
it, because if modules are modules are modules, we could build them as
part of world as we used to do and avoid building and rebuilding modules
with every kernel we're building. But building modules as part of the
world resulted in kernel and modules to be out of sync. We all know what
that means :-)
We currently don't have the interfaces to make that happen (modules
being modules that is). This implies that different installed kernels
can not always share the same /modules directory. This is especially
true during an upgrade, when the new kernel will be version V.x and the
old kernel will be version (V-1).y. If we don't have a seperate /modules
directory for the old kernel, we still have the "out-of-sync" problem.
--
Marcel Moolenaar
mail: marcel@cup.hp.com / marcel@FreeBSD.org
tel: (408) 447-4222
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3974869B.22E7924>