Change to kernel+modules build approach
John Baldwin
jhb at FreeBSD.org
Thu Aug 14 10:57:59 PDT 2003
On 14-Aug-2003 Andrew Gallatin wrote:
>
> John Baldwin writes:
> >
> > On 14-Aug-2003 Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 02:10:19AM -0600, Scott Long wrote:
> > >> Luoqi Chen wrote:
> > > [...]
> > >> >On the other hand, all modules should create all the opt_*.h files
> > >> >it needs when built individually. Add opt_ddb.h to nullfs's Makefile
> > >> >should fix the breakage.
> > >> >
> > >> Our kernel build system isn't set up to handle passing config options
> > >> to modules. Various solutions to this have been proposed, but nothing
> > >> has appeared yet. In 5.x, we document that modules will not work with
> > >> PAE.
> > >>
> > > How does the below look? This is basically a more generic implementation
> > > of Luoqi's idea, but for -CURRENT:
> >
> > I would prefer something far more radical that would involve moving
> > all the module metadata to sys/conf (i.e. removing sys/modules) and
> > building all the modules based on a single kernel config file.
>
> Would this tie modules to that kernel config? If so, would it mean
> the end of the ability of 3rd party developers to ship binary drivers
> and expect them to work with any kernel?
Well, yes, but, one could always build generic modules by using
a kernel config containing 'options KLD_MODULE' or some such.
This would allow one to compile optimized modules if they wanted to,
but still provide the ability to build fully generic modules.
--
John Baldwin <jhb at FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/
More information about the freebsd-current
mailing list