From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 27 22:54:32 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 820A337B401 for ; Tue, 27 May 2003 22:54:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cain.gsoft.com.au (genesi.lnk.telstra.net [139.130.136.161]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C627443FA3 for ; Tue, 27 May 2003 22:54:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cain.gsoft.com.au (8.12.9/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h4S5sAgD086520; Wed, 28 May 2003 15:24:11 +0930 (CST) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) From: "Daniel O'Connor" To: "M. Warner Losh" Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 15:24:10 +0930 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 References: <200305281147.53271.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <20030527.225207.101586684.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20030527.225207.101586684.imp@bsdimp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200305281524.10145.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> X-Spam-Score: -1.2 () CARRIAGE_RETURNS,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,SPAM_PHRASE_03_05,USER_AGENT X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.16 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang) cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: policy on GPL'd drivers? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 05:54:32 -0000 On Wed, 28 May 2003 14:22, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <200305281147.53271.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> > > "Daniel O'Connor" writes: > : The only downside is that there are no hooks into the build process so > : you have to be VERY careful when you update your kernel, or you get > : panics :( > > This is true. I'd thought that MODULES_OVERRIDE would help, but ports > builds and kernel builds are different enough to make this not easy to > do. > > Wanna test a patch? Add a 'makeoptions PORTS_MODULES=comms/ltmdm' to > your config file and apply the following patch. Lemme know how well > (or poorly) it works. There's likely some hidden assumptions that > make it appear to work for me. I don't see how it can work properly.. You need 'FORCE_PKG_REGISTER=' in the install target. I don't think how the patch is structured is sensible though :) 1) If the port is updated between builds you end up with two version of the port installed. 2) You can't control where the module gets put - arguably this isn't a calamity, but I think it makes more sense for the modules to end up in /boot/modules, or some analog to it that is in $PREFIX. IMHO a standard should be set WRT item 2 so future ports writers know what the proper way to do it is :) I guess the problem with mandating somewhere in $PREFIX is that the loader can't load it, so that's no good. I guess the only choice left is /boot/modules. Any comments? -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 9A8C 569F 685A D928 5140 AE4B 319B 41F4 5D17 FDD5