From owner-freebsd-current  Sun Aug  6 17:37:43 1995
Return-Path: current-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) id RAA25374
          for current-outgoing; Sun, 6 Aug 1995 17:37:43 -0700
Received: from cs.weber.edu (cs.weber.edu [137.190.16.16])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) with SMTP id RAA25364
          for <current@freebsd.org>; Sun, 6 Aug 1995 17:37:41 -0700
Received: by cs.weber.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1.1)
	id AA23707; Sun, 6 Aug 95 18:30:17 MDT
From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert)
Message-Id: <9508070030.AA23707@cs.weber.edu>
Subject: Re: bare bones kernel
To: davidg@Root.COM
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 95 18:30:17 MDT
Cc: swallace@eng.uci.edu, current@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199508062100.OAA03760@corbin.Root.COM> from "David Greenman" at Aug 6, 95 02:00:36 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4dev PL52]
Sender: current-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

> >Could someone explain to me why you must have "options FFS" and
> >"device npx0" in the kernel config file? Otherwise you get a linker
> >error:
> 
> >vfs_init.o: Undefined symbol `_vfs_set' referenced from text segment
> 
>    In our current design of the dynamic VFS stuff, at least *one* filesystem
> is required...it doesn't matter which one. I don't consider this a bug.

I'll have to think about whether this would really constitute a bug or
not, and then get back to you.

My gut feeling is that you should be able to run without a static file
system, or at least without a vnops table pointing to a Heidemann style
VFS.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@cs.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.