From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Oct 31 08:46:39 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3007516A41F
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Mon, 31 Oct 2005 08:46:39 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from danny@cs.huji.ac.il)
Received: from cs1.cs.huji.ac.il (cs1.cs.huji.ac.il [132.65.16.10])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE2BA43D45
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Mon, 31 Oct 2005 08:46:38 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from danny@cs.huji.ac.il)
Received: from pampa.cs.huji.ac.il ([132.65.80.32])
	by cs1.cs.huji.ac.il with esmtp
	id 1EWVJN-000CHW-JS; Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:46:37 +0200
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.0 06/18/2004 with nmh-1.0.4
To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of Mon, 31 Oct 2005 03:28:08 -0500 .
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:46:37 +0200
From: Danny Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il>
Message-ID: <E1EWVJN-000CHW-JS@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il>
Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: GENERIC and DEFAULTS 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 08:46:39 -0000


> You've clearly never spent much time on the FreeBSD support forums,
> where every few days someone posts for help
> 
> 1) with an error caused by removing one of those "Do not remove this!"
> lines, and
> 
> 2) for help on getting X working when they forgot to add /dev/io and
> /dev/mem to their kernel.
> 
> Those of us who spend a lot of time answering such questions will
> surely welcome the change, since it will hopefully reduce our
> workload.
> 
I understand - and appreciate, your problem. I still think that
the solution is wrong. I'm now checking, since it seems that io and
mem are loadable modules, that maybe the X start, or rc.d will make sure
that these modules are loaded? So that if someone who removes them from the
MYKERNCONF is still protected?

danny