On Mon, 16 Aug 1999, Mike Smith wrote:

> > >     Yes, this is very true.  But I think we are fooling ourselves if we 
> > >     believe linux emulation will not become 'standard' in the near future.
> > >     Then we'll kick ourselves for giving the sysctl's convoluted names :-)
> > 
> > Yeah... Then, the next in line after "linux" are: ibcs2 and svr4 and
> > whatever comes next. Can you live with them as main sysctl categories?
> Adding anything at the top level would be a terrible mistake.
> Given that "ABI" is a bit obscure, kern.compat is the only sensible 
> choice.

One one hand you're right (it is a compatibility stub) but OTOH it is also
a kernel module... ;-)

Perhaps modules like this will want to have their stuff in BOTH places,
i.e. in kernel.compat and in kernel.modules, depending what the given
sysctl does.

Andrzej Bialecki

//  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> WebGiro AB, Sweden (http://www.webgiro.com)
// -------------------------------------------------------------------
// ------ FreeBSD: The Power to Serve. http://www.freebsd.org --------
// --- Small & Embedded FreeBSD: http://www.freebsd.org/~picobsd/ ----

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to