From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Aug 28 19:34:00 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id TAA06806
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 28 Aug 1995 19:34:00 -0700
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.34])
          by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id TAA06797
          ; Mon, 28 Aug 1995 19:33:52 -0700
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.9/8.6.9) id MAA25986; Tue, 29 Aug 1995 12:31:38 +1000
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 12:31:38 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199508290231.MAA25986@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: davidg@Root.COM, terry@artisoft.com
Subject: Re: Terry's changes..
Cc: hackers@freefall.FreeBSD.org, julian@freefall.FreeBSD.org,
        terry@freefall.FreeBSD.org
Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>The SYSINIT stuff is about as conflicting as the PSEUDO_SET stuff for
>statically installed pseudo-devices.  It trades the ability to linearly
>read down the init_main.c (which is unclear anyway because of the
>startinit return after fork returning to the calling assembly instead
>of calling an assembly routine at the ens of startinit) for the ability
>to linearly look down the header file kernel.h for gross initialization
>order.  It also allows dropping in of binary modules, and because of the

Couldn't some of it have stayed as direct function calls?  It seems
excessive to use an init function just to print the copyright (I
had to introduce one because printf has the wrong type for an
init function).

I want to initialize clock interrupts earlier.  This requires moving at
least part of initclocks() to machine-dependent code and initializing
curproc = &proc0 later.  I don't want any non-determinism in the order
for this.

Bruce