From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Dec 12 11:36:16 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA17781
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 12 Dec 1997 11:36:16 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers)
Received: from webserver.smginc.com (webserver.smginc.com [204.170.176.2])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA17763
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 12 Dec 1997 11:36:03 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from AdamT@smginc.com)
Received: from smginc.com ([204.170.177.4]) by webserver.smginc.com
          (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-13723) with SMTP id AAA263;
          Fri, 12 Dec 1997 14:38:04 -0500
Received: by smginc.com with Microsoft Mail
	id <3491BC98@smginc.com>; Fri, 12 Dec 97 14:37:12 PST
From: Adam Turoff <AdamT@smginc.com>
To: hackers <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc: "'daniel_sobral@voga.com.br'" <daniel_sobral@voga.com.br>
Subject: RE: Why so many steps to build new kernel?
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 97 14:35:00 PST
Message-ID: <3491BC98@smginc.com>
Encoding: 18 TEXT
X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


>I don't think name/class/description is enough. We ought to identify
> prerequisites and mutual exclusions (see syscon and vt drivers for an
> example of both situations).

Sure, but (no offense) the prerequisites and mutual exclusions should
be handled better than the ports collection is (for example).

I seem to remember that RPM had a good idea of what a
'core' product is and what an 'upgrade' is so that when
you upgrade, your dependencies are migrated to the
new version of the product.

Or am I getting ahead of myself WRT kernel configs?

 -- Adam.