Re: RFC: separate 3dfx_linux module

Coleman Kane wrote:
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 03:13:05PM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote:

On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 03:11:02PM -0500, Coleman Kane wrote:

Sounds good to me. In the event that you want to build this statically
into the kernel, doesn't the option still need to be available,
or are we talking about a device tdfxlinux ?

It was exactly my point, too: the TDFX_LINUX option has to be there
so that people still can compile device tdfx with Linux support into
the main kernel file.


Not to mention so that they can omit said functionality if it is not
desired. I believe that the kmod by default compiles this in though.


--
Yar

Ok, I envisioned this as:

device tdfx
device tdfxlinux # Optional Linux compatibility

I don't have a strong opinion on it, and I'll defer to whatever Coleman
and Yar think is most appropriate.

SCott

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

Relevant Pages

  • Re: MFC Candidate: convert ffs_softdep.c over to callout(9)
    ... Coleman Kane wrote: ... The kernel did build fine for me when I built it. ... so I'd like to see some testers on better "supported" hardware. ... devfs on /dev ...
    (freebsd-stable)
  • Re: UFS_GJOURNAL and ufs.ko
    ... On Monday 18 December 2006 16:39, Coleman Kane wrote: ... UFS_GJOURNAL option hasn't been added to the ufs.ko kernel ... two seperate devices. ... It looks like an oversight to me, but I don't want to jump ...
    (freebsd-current)