From owner-freebsd-current  Mon Jan  4 16:00:52 1999
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA26210
          for freebsd-current-outgoing; Mon, 4 Jan 1999 16:00:52 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from po3.wam.umd.edu (po3.wam.umd.edu [128.8.10.165])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA26202
          for <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon, 4 Jan 1999 16:00:50 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from culverk@wam.umd.edu)
Received: from rac4.wam.umd.edu ((IDENT root)@rac4.wam.umd.edu [128.8.10.144])
	by po3.wam.umd.edu (8.9.0.Beta6/8.9.0.Beta6) with ESMTP id RAA24677;
	Mon, 4 Jan 1999 17:56:52 -0500 (EST)
Received: from rac4.wam.umd.edu ((IDENT sendmail)@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by rac4.wam.umd.edu (8.9.0.Beta6/8.9.0.Beta6) with SMTP id RAA22446;
	Mon, 4 Jan 1999 17:56:49 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost by rac4.wam.umd.edu (8.9.0.Beta6/8.9.0.Beta6) with SMTP id RAA22441;
	Mon, 4 Jan 1999 17:56:48 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: rac4.wam.umd.edu: culverk owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 17:56:48 -0500 (EST)
From: Kenneth Wayne Culver <culverk@wam.umd.edu>
To: Alex Zepeda <garbanzo@hooked.net>
cc: Sue Blake <sue@welearn.com.au>, npe@bfc.dk, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Kernel configurator
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9901041444120.317-100000@zippy.dyn.ml.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95q.990104175352.22071A-100000@rac4.wam.umd.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

> > Unless I'm mistaken, don't the options USERCONFIG, and its visual
> > counterpart already implement a "Kernel Configurator??" It's my
> > understanding that they do.
> 
> Yes, and no.  It allows one to configure a pre-made kernel, what the
> original post was most likely talking about was something used to
> determine what devices go into the kernel to begin w/.

That's what I thought, I just wasn't sure. It was my impression however
that UNIX wasn't supposed to be that simple. It was supposed to be more
stable. besides, unless the people know what they are doing when they look
at the configurator program (similar to some Linux dists) they may be even
more confused, and it's not that hard to make a custom kernel in the first
place. I personally don't think we need a kernel configurator.

Kenneth Culver


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message