From owner-freebsd-current Mon Apr 24 19:11:41 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from sasami.jurai.net (sasami.jurai.net [63.67.141.99]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F85E37BC4E for ; Mon, 24 Apr 2000 19:11:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from winter@jurai.net) Received: from localhost (winter@localhost) by sasami.jurai.net (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA59169; Mon, 24 Apr 2000 22:07:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 22:07:02 -0400 (EDT) From: "Matthew N. Dodd" To: Bill Fumerola Cc: "Rodney W. Grimes" , Richard Wackerbarth , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SMP changes and breaking kld object module compatibility In-Reply-To: <20000424171908.D397@jade.chc-chimes.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 24 Apr 2000, Bill Fumerola wrote: > The entire point is that somewhere the user has decided to upgrade > their system, and they need to know what the consequences are before > taking the plunge. If they upgrade their system half-ass (kernel, but > not modules) they are digging their own grave. More to the point, until the module versioning and dependency stuff hits the tree, KLD modules remain a useful novelty. I wouldn't consider them to be at all appropriate for production systems right now. The only reliable way to insure that a given module works with a given kernel is to build them from the same source tree at the same time. -- | Matthew N. Dodd | '78 Datsun 280Z | '75 Volvo 164E | FreeBSD/NetBSD | | winter@jurai.net | 2 x '84 Volvo 245DL | ix86,sparc,pmax | | http://www.jurai.net/~winter | This Space For Rent | ISO8802.5 4ever | To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message