Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 23:10:28 +0200 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: des@des.no (=?iso-8859-1?q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?=) Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] kldunload -f argument. Message-ID: <7551.1089321028@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 08 Jul 2004 23:04:18 %2B0200." <xzpn02a5hyl.fsf@dwp.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <xzpn02a5hyl.fsf@dwp.des.no>, =?iso-8859-1?q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= writes: >"Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> writes: >> "Dag-Erling_Smørgrav" writes: >> > MOD_SHUTDOWN perhaps? >> We already have that one unfortunately :-( > >Ah, silly me. Well, how about MOD_STOP? Better, but still not perfect. The problem is that this is the kind request, not the direct order: We're looking for a sensible version of: MOD_PREPARE_YOURSELF_TO_BE_UNLOADED_BUT_FAIL_IF_YOU_ARE_IN_USE_PLEASE :-) -- 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?7551.1089321028>