Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 23:30:52 +0100 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Resolving the crypto duplicity... Message-ID: <3144.1076020252@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 05 Feb 2004 07:45:49 MST." <20040205.074549.128866887.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20040205.074549.128866887.imp@bsdimp.com>, "M. Warner Losh" writes: >In message: <38921.1075966216@critter.freebsd.dk> > "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> writes: >: But as I said, it may be time to discuss the overall issue of kld >: dependencies, rather than just scratch my own little itch... > >Typically people just put the module dependency into their kld and get >on with their lives. There's really little to discuss except maybe >making an opencrypto module... At least as far as the dependency >issue with klds. I have no comment on the code duplication aspects. And that means that "optional dependencies" are not in the picture ? I want gbde to use opencrypto if it is there, but I do not want to require it (since it is optional from GBDE's point of view). Is there any sane way to do that ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3144.1076020252>