Re: Modular type GENERIC?
- From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 09:44:11 -0800
On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 07:26:04PM +0900, Adrian Chadd wrote:
I was just wondering why we're not shipping a GENERIC type..
configuration that simply loads the modules at startup, rather than a
statically linked kernel. I thought that was a large part of the push
for the modular framework in years past.
http://people.freebsd.org/~adrian/loader.conf
As you've shown the magic is in the loader.conf. I don't know a good way
to handle this other than attempt to load every module (like Microsoft NT
installer does) - and hope the probe of a driver that doesn't claim a
device doesn't leave that device in a bad state.
Have you tried putting every module in /boot/kernel into loader.conf in a
"load" statement?
--
-- David (obrien@xxxxxxxxxxx)
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Modular type GENERIC?
- From: Adrian Chadd
- Re: Modular type GENERIC?
- References:
- Modular type GENERIC?
- From: Adrian Chadd
- Modular type GENERIC?
- Prev by Date: Re: find -lname and -ilname implemented
- Next by Date: Re: emulate an end-of-media
- Previous by thread: Re: Modular type GENERIC?
- Next by thread: Re: Modular type GENERIC?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
