From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 9 10:07:12 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5A2F37B404; Fri, 9 May 2003 10:07:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0.freebsd-services.com (survey.codeburst.net [195.149.39.161]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C51DD43F93; Fri, 9 May 2003 10:07:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from paul@freebsd-services.com) Received: from [192.168.7.2] (freebsd.gotadsl.co.uk [81.6.249.198]) by mx0.freebsd-services.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E66C1B211; Fri, 9 May 2003 18:07:10 +0100 (BST) From: Paul Richards To: John Baldwin In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Organization: FreeBSD Services Ltd Message-Id: <1052499754.619.61.camel@cf.freebsd-services.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.4 Date: 09 May 2003 18:02:35 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: Peter Wemm cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/boot/i386/libi386 i386_module.c X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 17:07:13 -0000 On Fri, 2003-05-09 at 18:04, John Baldwin wrote: > On 09-May-2003 Paul Richards wrote: > > On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 10:25:37AM -0700, Peter Wemm wrote: > >> John Baldwin wrote: > >> > > >> > On 30-Apr-2003 Peter Wemm wrote: > >> > > peter 2003/04/30 15:02:39 PDT > >> > > > >> > > FreeBSD src repository > >> > > > >> > > Modified files: > >> > > sys/boot/i386/libi386 i386_module.c > >> > > Log: > >> > > ACPI will always be present on AMD64 - it will never be an autodetect > >> > > module. > >> > > >> > I would require it in the kernel rather than load it as a module then. > >> > >> Exactly. But I was just getting annoyed with this warning during > >> development while I had it stubbed out. > > > > You might still want it as a module even if it's mandatory so that > > you can choose which version to load from the bootloader when your > > testing new versions. > > That would only work if the kernel linker supported that. At > the moment it doesn't. :) I don't follow, I do this all the time? or do you mean that having it mandatory would not work if it's also a module? -- Paul Richards FreeBSD Services Ltd