Re: Silent stop for intel-microcode-netbsd

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

"William J. Coldwell" <billc%netbsd.org@localhost> writes:

> Since the Intel microcode can’t be unloaded (and this should only
> allow versions greater than what is loaded), it kinda should return
> error/fail.

I can see the point.  However, we currently seem to more or less have a
notion that the rc.d scripts are run in reverse order with stop.  An
alternative fix that declares it not to have a stop operation and thus
avoids calling stop at system shutdown seems reasonable.