[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: x86 GENERIC kernels unlobotomized
Am 09.08.11 19:07, schrieb Brian Buhrow:
> Hello. Creating a kern.tgz file in the sys/arch/xxx/compile/KERNEL
> directory of modules built when that kernel was built would be an excellent
> way to start getting me to use modular kernels as it would allow me to
> easily know whether the modules I have installed are from a particular
> build I did. There are times when I want to use old binary kernels that I
> built some time ago when my source trees were in a different state.
> Either I'm testing a change, and I want to be sure that I have a known
> working kernel so I can revert if things go badly, or I built a kernel with
> particular options for a specific application and there is a need to
> reinstall that kernel into a similar environment. I realize that the idea
> behinD MODules is that you don't need to build specific kernels anymore,
> but that doesn't solve the problem of debugging a change one might be
> making with the knowledge that there is an easy backout strategy, and there
> are still options in our kernel, I believe, that are only tunable by
> building specific kernels with specific options.
> Disk is cheap. Having a bunch of binary copies of modules laying around
> various compile trees is a small price to pay for the flexibility and
> versatility having those copies provides.
It's a bit off-topic, but I find the current state of affairs, having an
open directory with the modules, the right way. So I can easily add a
module to the system module area, without needing to create a tgz file.
I think we have more prevalent problems to solve with modules than where
to put the modules and in which form. We need to do the work and
modularize what is not yet, e.g.
> On Aug 9, 4:15pm, David Holland wrote:
> } Subject: Re: x86 GENERIC kernels unlobotomized
> } On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 11:42:50PM -0400, Martin S. Weber wrote:
> } > You mean -current's build.sh still doesn't put the modules in
> } > kern.tgz? Oh my...
> } >
> } > That was the simple "no need for people to be trained much"
> } > suggestion that had been brought up ~ 1 day after the move to the
> } > modular kernel and the first dozen or so had chopped their feet off
> } > with it :(
> } That's been one of the most contentious points all along, the claim
> } that modules are and must be independent of choice of kernel and must
> } not / cannot be built or installed or treated in any way as part of
> } the kernel.
> } There is, as far as I can tell, no sound technical basis for those
> } claims and various reasons why it's folly, but that apparently doesn't
> } change the situation.
> } --
> } David A. Holland
> } dholland%netbsd.org@localhost
>> -- End of excerpt from David Holland
Main Index |
Thread Index |