Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 11:30:54 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: koshy@india.hp.com (A JOSEPH KOSHY) Cc: gibbs@plutotech.com, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Kernel Module System Message-ID: <199704021830.LAA14025@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199704020527.AA134058855@fakir.india.hp.com> from "A JOSEPH KOSHY" at Apr 2, 97 10:27:35 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > You don't want a single version number really. You want one for each > > subsystem that an LKM may depend upon. For example, the SCSI system might > > Yes, but there is a tradeoff between complexity and utility. When things get more complex, there is an unfortunate increase in their utility as well? 8-) 8-) 8-p. > This is really a release engineering issue, not a development one, and I > think it may make it easier for third party vendors to offer binary only > LKM addons for FreeBSD. Yes. That should be one of the main considerations: how do you open up commercial markets to increase overall support of FreeBSD by vendors who want to support it, but can't because it's too closed. 8-(. Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704021830.LAA14025>