Jachym Holecek wrote:

> > >One other question: would it be acceptable for drvctl to be compiled
> > >unconditionally? Currently, it is subject to "pseudo-device". I'm not
> > >sure how to ellegantly support keeping it optional.
> > 
> > I don't think it should be optional.
> > 
> > In any case, even if it is, the infrastructure calls that drivers / 
> > busses would make could always be present in subr_autoconf.c
> 
> Ok, I'll make it non-optional for now.

How much does this the kernel object code size?  For low memory
situations where there is no attachable/detachable devices it might
be an overhead that isn't needed...

Simon.
--
Simon Burge                            <simonb@wasabisystems.com>
NetBSD Support and Service:         http://www.wasabisystems.com/