From owner-freebsd-current Wed Feb 7 17:34:45 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5D5537B69C for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:34:27 -0800 (PST) Received: (from bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id f181YKG10917; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:34:20 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 17:34:20 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Peter Wemm Cc: Leif Neland , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: *_ROOT removed Message-ID: <20010207173420.C26076@fw.wintelcom.net> References: <20010207151300.S26076@fw.wintelcom.net> <200102080125.f181PRt70396@mobile.wemm.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <200102080125.f181PRt70396@mobile.wemm.org>; from peter@netplex.com.au on Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 05:25:27PM -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * Peter Wemm [010207 17:25] wrote: > Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > * Peter Wemm [010207 06:29] wrote: > > > "Leif Neland" wrote: > > > > While the error-messages are clear, I don't remember seeing any heads-up, > or > > > mentioning of this in UPDATING > > > > > > > > Or is it just me...? > > > > > > No, there wasn't one.. The commit message was pretty clear - You are > > > reading them, right? We usually do HEAD UP's for stuff that will break > > > people pretty badly or get them in trouble (eg: an unviable kernel if the > > > instructions are not followed). > > > > > > At least you got the message. buildkernel would have silently ignored this > > > up until recently. > > > > Does this mean that 'FFS' isn't optional anymore? I mean it probably > > hasn't been (or never was) but the intention was that to build 4.4BSD > > you needed _either_ UFS or INET, but you could ditch either one and > > still build a kernel. > > No, FFS_ROOT was unused. We have a generic mountroot mechanism, so we no > longer needed to compile the "special" FFS-specific version of the code > into autoconf.c. FFS is still optional. For i386 FFS_ROOT and CD9660_ROOT > did nothing, and on alpha/ia64 it did something that was more likely to > cause problems than help. Sorry, I should have looked at the delta but the cvs message wasn't included in the gripe. thanks for clearing it up. -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message