Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 11:56:42 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Request for help: how do teach module building about kernel options? Message-ID: <B25F6CF4-6FBF-4E47-8832-AD4830E61728@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmondtfzqRhD5nFZuHYJOc91sKM4BKhkVZsq0w4bgtDTFvw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAJ-Vmomk4JTnZ0avRqdte9Th5F7G7x9eWTcwcd%2BT4HrcE0Mgxw@mail.gmail.com> <15285562-E9BA-431B-A2C1-D0547DFB2663@bsdimp.com> <201201030924.44493.jhb@freebsd.org> <CAJ-VmondtfzqRhD5nFZuHYJOc91sKM4BKhkVZsq0w4bgtDTFvw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jan 3, 2012, at 10:30 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 3 January 2012 06:24, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: >=20 >>> Working off the cuff, I'd propose the following API: >>>=20 >>> KERNOPTS=3Dfoo baz >>> SRC_FOO =3D foo.c >>> SRC_BAZ =3D baz.c >>> SRC=3D a.c b.c d.c >>>=20 >>> And have the magic needed to conditionally add SRC_FOO and SRC_BAZ = to SRC in bsd.kern.mk. >=20 > I'd be happy with the former to begin with, based on all the options. > Devices would be nice too, but that can come later. > How about: >=20 > KERNOPTS=3Dfoo baz > KERNDEVICES=3Da b c d e I think you are misunderstanding what I'm trying to say. This isn't = "options foo and bar from the kernel config file" but rather "please let = me build things based on what's in the opt_foo.h and opt_bar.h files" > Or if we're goign for linux-like config.mk (which would save on line > length issues, for very large kernel config files?): >=20 > KERNOPTS_foo=3D > KERNOPTS_bar=3DXXX > KERNOPTS_baz=3DYYY >=20 >> Not only that, but it would be nice if the list of modules to be = built could >> be tailored to what options are enabled. For example, if I build a = kernel that >> doesn't have inet or inet6 then it shouldn't try to build ipfw, etc. >=20 > That'd be nice too, but it's almost like we'd need another domain > specific language just to describe how to build sys/modules/Makefile. > :-) Right now MODULES_OVERRIDE provides an adequate hook for this. > So how about we do up say, the KERNOPTS field first, which would be a > big win. Then KERNDEVICES too, if that's possible? I'd only planned on doing KERNOPTS :) Warner=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?B25F6CF4-6FBF-4E47-8832-AD4830E61728>