Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 20:29:07 +0200 From: "Vincent Barus" <vibarus@googlemail.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: difference between loading kernel module during boot and after boot manually? Message-ID: <e4207650807141129je2b7aa5p557546176bdb0f65@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <200807082011.23341.fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> References: <e4207650806221429y4e9c01d2i6d082bbad8a54c54@mail.gmail.com> <e4207650807080748o47b5cc8akd53672305cbd63f6@mail.gmail.com> <200807082011.23341.fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 8:11 PM, Mel <fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> wrote: > On Tuesday 08 July 2008 16:48:26 Vincent Barus wrote: > >> does anyone have an idea what's the difference or what _could_ be the >> difference on loading a kernel module during boot or manually? > > There's one major difference. File systems aren't mounted at loader stage, so > any reference to modules/libraries that exist on a different partition, will > fail. > > -- > Mel > > Problem with today's modular software: they start with the modules > and never get to the software part. > Right now i have only one partition and the same problem occurs. Other modules e.g. for sound or the nvidia module work as a charm. So I think that's not the only difference. I can live with a module loaded at the end of the boot process/after login but I don't think that's the real solution. Regards, Vincent
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?e4207650807141129je2b7aa5p557546176bdb0f65>