Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1999 20:34:34 +0900 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Andrzej Bialecki <abial@webgiro.com>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@scc.nl>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Q: Extending the sysctl MIB for Linuxulator variables Message-ID: <37B948CA.6E2DE113@newsguy.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9908161900230.34377-100000@freja.webgiro.com> <199908161709.KAA10454@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matthew Dillon wrote: > > :Well, it's also a module, so perhaps we should create the whole subtree > :for modules (as was already discussed several times..) > : > :Andrzej Bialecki > > Yes, this is very true. But I think we are fooling ourselves if we > believe linux emulation will not become 'standard' in the near future. > Then we'll kick ourselves for giving the sysctl's convoluted names :-) Also, the way we choose to tread leds to a highly modularized kernel. Placing stuff in a "module" category would be somewhat redundant, then. -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) dcs@newsguy.com dcs@freebsd.org "You intend to eat me, then?" he asked the dragon. "Well, I must admit, more for the amusement than the taste." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?37B948CA.6E2DE113>