>>>>> On Wed, 12 May 1999 09:35:36 -0400,
"Rick Whitesel" <[email protected]> said:
> In general I believe that dynamic configuration of the system is
> extremely useful to both the development community and the user
> community. The development community has a much easier time if they
> can load / unload drivers. As for the users, my rule of thumb is
> that a computer should never ask a human the answer to a question
> that it can find out for itself. I think this is especially true for
> configuration information. In addition, the need for dynamic system
> (re)configuration will only increase as features like PCI hot swap
> become the standard.
Of course, I completely agree with you.
The reason I prefer newconfig is it actually can support dynamic
configuration better than the new-bus. All features which new-bus has
can be implemented on newconfig, too. And, more. (See the description
about on-demand dynamic loading in my previous post.)
Furthremore, newconfig does static configuration better than the
new-bus, and newconfig has a option which removes dynamic configuration
entirely from kernel. New-bus apparently doesn't have this option.
So, which is flexible ? :-)
--
[email protected] Software Research Associates, Inc., Japan
(Noriyuki Soda) Advanced Technology Group.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [email protected]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
