Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1999 13:11:12 -0800 From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Cc: Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com>, mike@smith.net.au (Mike Smith), current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: kvm question Message-ID: <199901242111.NAA05078@dingo.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 24 Jan 1999 16:10:30 EST." <199901242110.QAA17006@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> <<On Sat, 23 Jan 1999 11:04:15 -0800 (PST), Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com> said: > > > Peter pointed out that having the sysctl's as symbols was a nice > > advantage of the current system. How important is this? > > I don't think it's important at all. (Then again, I liked the old > system.) > > > If we were willing to give this up, then the SYSCTL() macro could > > just expand to a SYSINIT() that called sysctl_add_subtree() (or > > whatever you want to call it) upon loading. > > Seems reasonable to me. The only problem with this is likely to be > OID_AUTO, which I happen to think is bogus anyway. It is vital that > we maintain the ability to reference sysctl entities by compile-time > constant integers, so as not to break backwards compatibility with > other 4.4 systems and the Stevens books. Backwards compatibility is one thing, but new nodes should be named, not numbered. OID_AUTO is bogus because it perpetuates the numbering of nodes. -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199901242111.NAA05078>