Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 23:15:15 -0400 (EDT) From: James Howard <howardjp@wam.umd.edu> To: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: KLDs Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.9910102311210.19567-100000@rac3.wam.umd.edu> In-Reply-To: <199910102202.PAA08093@dingo.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Mike Smith wrote: > You should note that neither QNX nor FreeBSD exhibit the above > behaviour. KLD is a linker; it allows you to link more stuff into the > kernel after it's been started. It doesn't implement a coprocess model > of any sort. Yes, I knew this for FreeBSD, and for QNX, well, Slashdot again proves to be totally unreliable. :) > Indeed it would. There's some fairly strong resistance to this being > the _only_ way that FreeBSD works, but the level of modularity you I don't think this is a good idea but it would certainly be a swank thing to see. Is it possible to compile a kernel with no filesystems supported and have the boot loader load FFS? I have built an FFS module but I have not yet had time to test it. Frankly, I am kind of afraid to for fear of trashing my system. > > Has anyone else thought about this? Is this a good idea? Is this a > > bad idea? > > Yes, Yes, Yes. Could you claify this? :) Jamie 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?Pine.GSO.4.10.9910102311210.19567-100000>