From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 17 23:42:12 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C96B71065672 for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 23:42:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sendtomatt@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pw0-f54.google.com (mail-pw0-f54.google.com [209.85.160.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91E728FC15 for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 23:42:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pbcxa7 with SMTP id xa7so4796109pbc.13 for ; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 15:42:12 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of sendtomatt@gmail.com designates 10.68.72.70 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.68.72.70; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of sendtomatt@gmail.com designates 10.68.72.70 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=sendtomatt@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=sendtomatt@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.68.72.70]) by 10.68.72.70 with SMTP id b6mr36250042pbv.58.1329522132247 (num_hops = 1); Fri, 17 Feb 2012 15:42:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=7xDdeYf6L+9yaqjtiBIJFf7pp/V1pR1wo+hgruFGuZY=; b=Ca64yjzWToz+juFKvFOb18mj772vwF513BkbG0OCRv/XK6LxnqgQnmc7uSCBwuOj5I 9CutYWiT1UMKOw6MPmlFn9+M8n/HQZiDTZQ942qf0c0ReCmUt9Vqz6dBKaudb2fCK5JQ KJGPmDwIoUZ+4qQjsSj8NbKWW7Xkl5+d7R/fs= Received: by 10.68.72.70 with SMTP id b6mr29143591pbv.58.1329520378477; Fri, 17 Feb 2012 15:12:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from bakeneko.local (adsl-67-118-230-86.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net. [67.118.230.86]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 7sm17846815pbw.13.2012.02.17.15.12.56 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 17 Feb 2012 15:12:57 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4F3EDEBC.7040703@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 15:11:56 -0800 From: matt User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20120111 Thunderbird/9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rank1seeker@gmail.com References: <4F3E8225.9030501@FreeBSD.org> <4F3E8C26.3080900@FreeBSD.org> <4F3EA5F2.9070804@gmail.com> <4F3EAE5F.6070903@gmail.com> <20120217.220802.988.2@DOMY-PC> In-Reply-To: <20120217.220802.988.2@DOMY-PC> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 8 to 9: Kernel modularization -- did it change? X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 23:42:13 -0000 On 02/17/12 14:08, rank1seeker@gmail.com wrote: >> For me as a user, that would be a much preferable approach, instilled >> long ago by Linux. I don't like unused stuff around, and I like to >> understand what I am using. >> >> Some build kernel confutation parameters "minimum modules", "medium >> modules", "maximum modules" might be utilized. I would be using >> "medium" or most likely "maximum", leaving me with a minimal kernel. >> >> -- Alex -- alex-goncharov@comcast.net -- > NO. > >> Thinking bigger picture (beyond sound), would it make sense to keep >> GENERIC very minimal, but provide an extensive loader.conf with a >> default install...so most things worked, but were loaded as modules? >> >> Matt > NO. > > > You can't base a "wish" on a solution for YOURS problems! > > GENERIC must be as giantic as possible, to make as many machines as pos= sible to BOOT and enable all what can be enabled in/on them. > THEN ... individual "strips" unhooked parts -> custom kernel, via wich = you "specialize it", for your hardware! > > That is, unless individual is passive/bored (lazy?) and prefer everythi= ng on a silver plate ... > There are many paths in that case ... > Windows are the easiest solution. THEY THINK FOR YOU! > ;) > > > Domagoj Smol=E8i=E6 > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.o= rg" I'm tired of Linux and "everything should be in the kernel, implemented 4 ways" approach. I think you misunderstood. GENERIC should be able to boot anything bootable within the architecture, right? We agree on that. Is sound required for booting? We have a modular kernel. It makes best-practices-sense to keep the kernel true to what's required to boot and initialize the hardware required to come up multiuser. I am actually against having sound in there at all. However, as a compromise, if it must be in there, then put it in loader.conf and not the kernel. Do we still disagree? Matt