CURRENT state of modules

From: toxa (postfix_at_sendmail.ru)
Date: 12/12/03

  • Next message: David Bremner: "Re: atapicam broken by ata_lowlevel.c rev.1.23" 
    To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 19:10:14 +0300

    Hi again

    Looking back through mailing list I found only one big thread about advantages
    and disadvantages of kernel modules and still have questions about it.
     
    Now with upgrading from 5.1-current to 5.2-current because of trying if usb
    subsystem still broken or not on my laptop, I decide to build a big part of
    kernel as modules. I remove many devices from kernel putting'em into
    loader.conf:

    bitmap_load="YES"
    bitmap_name="/boot/splash.bmp"
    splash_bmp_load="YES"
    vesa_load="YES"
    acpi_load="YES"
    daemon_saver_load="YES"
    nfsclient_load="YES'
    smb_load="YES"
    agp_load="YES"
    usb_load="YES"
    ugen_load="YES"
    uhid_load="YES"
    umass_load="YES"
    ums_load="YES
    ukbd_load="YES"
    cardbus_load="YES"
    pccard_load="YES"
    cbb_load="YES"
    radeon_load="YES"
    wlan_load="YES"
    if_wi_load="YES"

    There are all usb devices, wireless lan devices, pcmcia devices, video devices
    (agp, radeon) and nfs features.

    So my question is loading MANY modules will be as stable (or as unstable) as
    putting them into kernel as appropriate devices (or options), or I will found
    some problems?

    Thanks.
      

    _______________________________________________
    freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
    http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
    To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"

  • Next message: David Bremner: "Re: atapicam broken by ata_lowlevel.c rev.1.23"

    Relevant Pages