Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 16:11:58 -0700 (MST) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: phk@phk.freebsd.dk Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Resolving the crypto duplicity... Message-ID: <20040205.161158.71089474.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <3144.1076020252@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <20040205.074549.128866887.imp@bsdimp.com> <3144.1076020252@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <3144.1076020252@critter.freebsd.dk>
"Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> writes:
: 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 ?
Ah. I see.
Yes, there's a way to do it, but it requires lots of cooperation on
the part the optional module.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040205.161158.71089474.imp>