From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 30 23:22:41 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 655E416A41F for ; Sun, 30 Oct 2005 23:22:41 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd-stable@box559.com) Received: from mx4.x15.net (mx4.x15.net [69.55.237.194]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3556043D49 for ; Sun, 30 Oct 2005 23:22:41 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd-stable@box559.com) Received: from j1.x15.net [63.196.213.76] by mx4.x15.net with ESMTP id 510201052X1EWMVc000GrJNu for ; Sun, 30 Oct 2005 23:22:40 +0000 Message-ID: <436555A1.3010305@box559.com> Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 15:22:09 -0800 From: Pete Slagle MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org References: <4364A727.9090106@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <4364A727.9090106@gmx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: GENERIC and DEFAULTS X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 23:22:41 -0000 >> I've seen that 'GENERIC' file has been modified, moving some lines to >> 'DEFAULTS': >> >> device isa >> >> device mem # Memory and kernel memory devices >> device io # I/O device >> >> Why? >> What does it mean? Should we include 'DEFAULTS' in our customized >> 'GENERIC'? >> Or those lines are no more mandatory? >> > > No, you don't need to include 'DEFAULTS', config(8) will take care of > that for you. > > http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200510271713.j9RHDNTo013082 > > AFAICT, this was done in order to automatically include devices which > are essential in most cases so less experienced users won't accidentally > break their systems and later complain that e.g. X doesn't work anymore. The whole mechanism seems like an obvious POLA violation. All the more so without a note in UPDATING. Personally, I prefer less automated "help." In general, it might be better to encourage those who need a nanny to run Windows, leaving FreeBSD unencumbered for those who don't. IMHO.