Candidates for inclusion in DEFAULTS

Alexander Leidinger Alexander at
Mon Jan 2 10:52:15 PST 2006

Matt Emmerton <matt at> wrote:

> Just looking through the kernel code, and there are many strong warnings (in
> NOTES, GENERIC and various bits of code) that strongly advise *not* removing
> COMPAT_43 from the kernel config.
> In fact, doing so causes lots of things to break, especially the
> Linuxulator.
> That said, would COMPAT_43 (and possibly COMPAT_FREEBSD4 and
> COMPAT_FREEBSD5) be good candidates to put in DEFAULTS -- at least on i386?

There's a PR with a patch which removes the dependency from the linuxolator.
My intend is to give it a try (and commit it). Maybe this week, if time

Regarding the FreeBSD compatibility options: if you don't run software from
those releases, you don't need them. Entries in DEFAULTS are supposed to
render any kernel useless if removed. So I don't think the FreeBSD
compatibility options are good candidates for DEFAULTS.


--  Alexander @ PGP ID = B0063FE7     netchild @  : PGP ID = 72077137
I believe that professional wrestling is clean
and everything else in the world is fixed.
		-- Frank Deford, sports writer

More information about the freebsd-current mailing list