From owner-freebsd-current Sat Jan 4 01:51:29 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id BAA09203 for current-outgoing; Sat, 4 Jan 1997 01:51:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de [141.76.1.11]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id BAA09179 for ; Sat, 4 Jan 1997 01:51:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from sax.sax.de (sax.sax.de [193.175.26.33]) by irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (8.6.12/8.6.12-s1) with ESMTP id KAA09172 for ; Sat, 4 Jan 1997 10:51:20 +0100 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by sax.sax.de (8.6.12/8.6.12-s1) with UUCP id KAA02209 for current@FreeBSD.ORG; Sat, 4 Jan 1997 10:51:20 +0100 Received: (from j@localhost) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.8.4/8.6.9) id KAA19262; Sat, 4 Jan 1997 10:36:46 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 10:36:46 +0100 From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: kernel w/o source? [MOD_DECL in lkm.h] References: <199701040051.LAA28752@freebsd1.cimlogic.com.au> X-Mailer: Mutt 0.55-PL10 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669 X-PGP-Fingerprint: DC 47 E6 E4 FF A6 E9 8F 93 21 E0 7D F9 12 D6 4E Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) In-Reply-To: <199701040051.LAA28752@freebsd1.cimlogic.com.au>; from John Birrell on Jan 4, 1997 11:51:27 +1100 Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk As John Birrell wrote: (DEVFS) > > Define `universal'. > > Default? I dunno, the crystal ball was a little fuzzy. 8-) Default: yes, probably. > > Second, you can't have compile-time options anymore then. IOW, you > > gotta include everything into the compiled object already, to make it > > run-time selectable. > > I'm not sure that I agree with this. For DEBUG and DIAGNOSTIC maybe, > but most of the options involve linking in code (or not) and filling > in device arrays. After browsing through the options listed in LINT, it seems that you are right. > Once you make most options loadable as kernel > modules, ... Loadable modules is one thing. Another thing is to still link it to the conglomerate kernel, but from .o files. That's basically the `classic' SysV way. It's not that bright like LKMs, but certainly easier to handle. Of course, you are free to unbreak all the currently broken LKMs. :) Many people often ask for what they could do in the FreeBSD project -- well that's one that could be done: fix the LKM mechanism. > Does FreeBSD *really* have to be a system that only nurds play with? 8-) I can't answer that question -- i can't find `nurd' in my dictionary. :) Anyway, i was merely referring to the question of the relation between effort to spend into get such a scenario really flying, compared to the fairly little cost of a kernel compilation. You can perhaps compile 10000 kernel from scratch in the time you need to do what you're suggesting. ;-) Admittedly, the biggest cost factor ain't compile time, but probably the 30 MB for the kernel source & objects. OTOH, even disk space is comparably cheap these, by sure much cheaper than the scarce resource called ``FreeBSD developer's time''. > [blows dust of old Motorola system] Now, how do I boot this SysV thingy? > Sigh. It still works, damn! C'mon, it doesn't have LKMs either, only a bunch of .a/.o files. -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)