Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2011 13:43:55 +0300 From: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] shipping kernels with default modules? Message-ID: <20110611104355.GH48734@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> In-Reply-To: <BANLkTin2AwKRT7N6HWqBctJcT72_mR=Otg@mail.gmail.com> References: <BANLkTin2AwKRT7N6HWqBctJcT72_mR=Otg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--qVdROpInvt/uIoBf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 05:21:20PM +0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: > Hi guys, >=20 > Has there been any further thought as of late about shipping kernels > with modules only by default, rather than monolithic kernels? >=20 > I tried this experiment a couple years ago and besides a little > trickery with ACPI module loading, it worked out fine. >=20 > Is there any reason we aren't doing this at the moment? Eg by having a > default loader modules list populated from the kernel config file? I use highly modularized kernel on all machines, because it allows me to use (almost) the same kernel config. Will you provide a prototype change for your suggestion ? --qVdROpInvt/uIoBf Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk3zRuoACgkQC3+MBN1Mb4h1PwCgz22Yo5a5yqOR+aIt/V+dJZYS IpIAn34gXyQckN0dZ+RUoFfRhoYp8FJf =C+6t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --qVdROpInvt/uIoBf--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110611104355.GH48734>