8 to 9: Kernel modularization -- did it change?

Alex Goncharov alex-goncharov at comcast.net
Fri Feb 17 22:41:27 UTC 2012

,--- You/rank1seeker at gmail.com (Fri, 17 Feb 2012 23:08:02 +0100) ----*
| > For me as a user, that would be a much preferable approach, instilled
| > long ago by Linux. I don't like unused stuff around, and I like to
| > understand what I am using.
| > 
| > Some build kernel confutation parameters "minimum modules", "medium
| > modules", "maximum modules" might be utilized.  I would be using
| > "medium" or most likely "maximum", leaving me with a minimal kernel.
| > 
| > -- Alex -- alex-goncharov at comcast.net --
| NO.

What does your "NO" stand for?  That it would not be a preferable
approach "For me as a user"?  I wasn't speaking for others :)
| > Thinking bigger picture (beyond sound), would it make sense to keep
| > GENERIC very minimal, but provide an extensive loader.conf with a
| > default install...so most things worked, but were loaded as modules?
| > 
| > Matt
| NO.

"NO" here: would not make sense?  It will be unlikely done but how do
you know what makes sense for others?

I for one, don't have any interest in the PCCARD code built into the
kernel.  Etc.

| You can't base a "wish" on a solution for YOURS problems!

I was not asking for the new code, but I could express my idea of what
made sense for me.

| GENERIC must be as giantic as possible, to make as many machines as possible to BOOT and enable all what can be enabled in/on them.
| THEN ... individual "strips" unhooked parts -> custom kernel, via
| wich you "specialize it", for your hardware!

Then provide MINIMAL in sys/ARCH/conf, and one could use it (I am not
asking for it -- I've been doing it on my own -- I am talking in
| That is, unless individual is passive/bored (lazy?) and prefer everything on a silver plate ...

I don't see any logic in how you passed to this passage.

| There are many paths in that case ...
| Windows are the easiest solution. THEY THINK FOR YOU!
| ;)


What's bad in "the easiest solution" per se?

And one would be not prudent to keep laughing over Windows, thinking
Windows NT, when 8 is almost here.

But this is off topic, sorry, you all.

-- Alex -- alex-goncharov at comcast.net --

More information about the freebsd-hackers mailing list