Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 1 May 1997 12:14:37 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Ben Black <black@zen.cypher.net>
To:        Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Cc:        ccsanady@nyx.pr.mcs.net, dfr@nlsystems.com, msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, bde@zeta.org.au, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Unloading LKMs (was Re: A Desparate Plea for Help...)
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.3.91.970501121205.8517N-100000@zen.cypher.net>
In-Reply-To: <199705011716.KAA04240@phaeton.artisoft.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
i think my statement was taken the wrong way.  i think it is a Good Thing 
to break up the kernel into dynamically loadable modules.  solaris is 
just the operating system i use most that is structured in that way.

on the subject of solaris, is anyone thinking about a crash-like program 
to provide a unified interface for viewing and setting kernels parameters 
and status?


b3n

On Thu, 1 May 1997, Terry Lambert wrote:

> > welcome to solaris.
> > 
> > > How about a statically loaded version of the kernel?  I mean, will it now
> > > be nothing more than an aggregate of some modules?  It would be nice if
> > > all there were were modules, and to make yourself a kernel, you just
> > > had to stick them together..
> 
> Which makes it no less nice for it being invented there first.
> 
> 
> 					Terry Lambert
> 					terry@lambert.org
> ---
> Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
> or previous employers.
> 



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.3.91.970501121205.8517N-100000>