From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Mar 21 7:39:28 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A4A937B401; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 07:39:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay1.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua (oberon.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua [195.245.194.35]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A052E43FAF; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 07:39:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nikolay@asu.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua) Received: by relay1.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua (Postfix, from userid 426) id CC673199F0; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 17:39:11 +0200 (EET) Received: from onyx.asu.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua (eth0.onyx.asu.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua [10.18.16.2]) by relay1.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua (Postfix) with ESMTP id B210319CF3; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 17:39:07 +0200 (EET) Received: from drweb by onyx.asu.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua with drweb-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 18wObr-0002am-00; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 17:39:07 +0200 Received: from nikolay by onyx.asu.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua with local (Exim 4.10) id 18wObr-0002ag-00; Fri, 21 Mar 2003 17:39:07 +0200 Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 17:39:07 +0200 From: "Nikolay Y. Orlyuk" To: Yar Tikhiy Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Build options for kernel modules Message-ID: <20030321153907.GQ76182@asu.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua> References: <20030321153217.GA53518@comp.chem.msu.su> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030321153217.GA53518@comp.chem.msu.su> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i 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 On Fri, Mar 21, 2003 at 06:32:17PM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote: > Hi there, > > Excuse my stupid question, but I seem to have no time to do the > investigation by myself right now so I'd be glad to receive a brief > answer from someone who has the information. > > As far as I can see, kernel modules should be built along with the > kernel for the only reason of keeping their mutual interfaces in > sync, has a source file defining such an interface changed. Is > there currently no way to go further and affect a kernel module's > built-in features with kernel config file options, besides modifying > makefiles in /sys/modules? I think this isn't so. I have been already tried to compile some modules without compiling kernel and this trye has successful result, but without change options. I think modules must be build with same or less imports and same or more export to be correct for loading. > -- With best wishes Nikolay mail: nikolay@asu.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message