From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Dec 11 3:25:53 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from chmls16.mediaone.net (chmls16.mediaone.net [24.147.1.151]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B1FC37B416 for ; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:25:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from gandalf (h00045ae37142.ne.mediaone.net [65.96.123.237]) by chmls16.mediaone.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id fBBBPmT20603 for ; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 06:25:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <005c01c18236$a50f1b00$6401a8c0@gandalf> From: "Dragon Fire" To: Subject: KLDs vs static linking Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 06:26:09 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hi Folks, Hopefully a quick question. Is there any reason to prefer KLD modules for drivers etc over static linking? For example, KLDs are covenient, loading and unloading for development but is it a case of using KLD modules for development then building drivers statically into the kernel when development is complete.Or is it a case of KLDs are now supported and are the preferred method of development moving forward. I've read the online KLD docs, developed the code and greped through kern_linker.c so I understand how to develop KLDs it but would like to supplement my understanding. Thanks in advance, To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message