Re: Time to merge the pgoyette-compat branch (take two)

[David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Sun, Sep 09, 2018 at 04:09:20PM +1000, matthew green wrote:
 > again, without looking too closely, i think the ultimate problem
 > here is that libcompat in the kernel is the wrong design, and it
 > should not be a kernel library.
 > 
 > it is probably this way to ease maintenance of other lists, since
 > what depends upon what code is fairly interdependant, and if you
 > just shove all the code in a library and link it, the stuff you
 > need is there, and the stuff you need isn't.
 > 
 > but really, all the code that depends upon other code should be
 > listed more explicitly, so that config/make can deal with it
 > instead of leaving it for the linker.  christos?  can you think
 > of any other/better ways to avoid this?  i think the only real
 > answer is to abandon kernel libcompat as-is.

If it's going to be modules it's all got to be sorted out explicitly,
so that the module dependence logic can address it, or it will all
never really work properly.

now, it would be great if we could have one config system in which to
describe this instead of three...

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost