From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Apr 30 08:51:27 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA02752
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 30 Apr 1997 08:51:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.19])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA02743
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 30 Apr 1997 08:51:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.8.5/8.6.9) id BAA30982; Thu, 1 May 1997 01:46:12 +1000
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 01:46:12 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199704301546.BAA30982@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: hackers@freebsd.org, rminnich@Sarnoff.COM
Subject: Re: Unloading LKMs (was Re: A Desparate Plea for Help...)
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>I agree on the comment re linker sets. I would like to see these vanish
>for a simple reason: try sometime to build a really minimal kernel and it 
>will fail at link time since there are missing linker sets. ouch. 
>
>By minimal, i mean minus any file systems for example. And yes, I do have 
>a use for this.

You can consider this a feature.  If something fails to link due to a
reference to a nonexistent linker set, then the something isn't properly
ifdefed for minimality.

Bruce