Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 19:16:58 +0300 From: Yar Tikhiy <yar@freebsd.org> To: "Nikolay Y. Orlyuk" <nikolay@asu.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Build options for kernel modules Message-ID: <20030321161658.GA56375@comp.chem.msu.su> In-Reply-To: <20030321153907.GQ76182@asu.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua> References: <20030321153217.GA53518@comp.chem.msu.su> <20030321153907.GQ76182@asu.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Mar 21, 2003 at 05:39:07PM +0200, Nikolay Y. Orlyuk wrote: > On Fri, Mar 21, 2003 at 06:32:17PM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote: > > Hi there, > > > > Excuse my stupid question, but I seem to have no time to do the > > investigation by myself right now so I'd be glad to receive a brief > > answer from someone who has the information. > > > > As far as I can see, kernel modules should be built along with the > > kernel for the only reason of keeping their mutual interfaces in > > sync, has a source file defining such an interface changed. Is > > there currently no way to go further and affect a kernel module's > > built-in features with kernel config file options, besides modifying > > makefiles in /sys/modules? > I think this isn't so. I have been already tried to compile some modules > without compiling kernel and this trye has successful result, but without > change options. > I think modules must be build with same or less imports and same or more export to be correct > for loading. Yeah, it's all right to compile modules w/o the kernel, but that's not exactly what I was asking about. My question was whether "option FOO" lines from a kernel configuration file could influence modules. -- Yar To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030321161658.GA56375>