Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 00:11:08 +0100 From: Maxime Henrion <mux@FreeBSD.org> To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, obrien@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/conf DEFAULTS GENERIC Message-ID: <20051030231108.GQ1327@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <4364D017.1050605@samsco.org> References: <200510271734.j9RHYZAk015054@repoman.freebsd.org> <20051030062148.GA76667@dragon.NUXI.org> <4364D017.1050605@samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Scott Long wrote: > David O'Brien wrote: > >On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 05:34:35PM +0000, John Baldwin wrote: > > > >>jhb 2005-10-27 17:34:35 UTC > >> > >> FreeBSD src repository > >> > >> Modified files: > >> sys/i386/conf GENERIC > >> Added files: > >> sys/i386/conf DEFAULTS > >> Log: > >> Create a default kernel config for i386 and move 'device isa' and > >> 'device npx' (both of which aren't really optional right now) and > >> 'device io' and 'device mem' (to preserve POLA for 4.x users upgrading > >> to 6.0) from GENERIC into DEFAULTS. > > > > > >I may be missing something. I don't quite follow the benefit of the new > >'DEFAULTS' file. > > It's been 2+ years since the io and mem devices were made optional, and > the mailing lists are still filled with people who don't understand why > X doesn't work after they remove them from their kernel config. We > expect there to be a large migration of people from 4.x to 6.0 who > never tracked the change in 5.x, or who want to bring their 4.x kernel > config files over with as few surprises as possible, so this will make > their lives easier. > > > I'm also curious why we don't explicitly 'include' > >DEFAULTS in GENERIC vs. the new automagic include feature. > > Because if it was specifically mentioned in the GENERIC config file then > it would be deleted by people who don't understand what it does or why > it's important, and it would be missed by people writing config files > from scratch or migrating from previous versions of FreeBSD. While I'm all for making FreeBSD less prone to errors like the one discussed here, I feel that having: a DEFAULTS file, a good comment explaining what purpose it serves in it, an explicit include DEFAULTS in GENERIC and a big scary comment next to it inclde explaining why one should not remove it ought to be sufficient. I believe this approach would give enough seatbelts to our users while being more pleasing technically speaking, since we wouldn't have an automagic include feature in config(8). (It should be noted that there were no comment next to the mem and io devices which can probably at least partly explain why it has been such a recurent problem). Just my 2 cents... Thanks to you and other re@ members for all the great work accomplished with 6.0-RELEASE. Cheers, Maxime
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051030231108.GQ1327>