Personally, I don't think that's a bad idea, I never had trouble going to
/usr/src/sys/modules and doing a make depend then make then make install,
but I guess it'd be nicer if everything just compiled when I built my
kernel, and better yet, it would be nice to have it make the
"modules.old" directory somewhere.

| Kenneth Culver              | FreeBSD: The best OS around.    |
| Unix Systems Administrator  | ICQ #: 24767726                 |
| and student at The          | AIM: muythaibxr                 |
| The University of Maryland, | Website: (Under Construction)   |
| College Park.               ||

On Mon, 24 Apr 2000, Brandon D. Valentine wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Apr 2000, Kenneth Wayne Culver wrote:
> >I believe that it depends on what changes were made since the last
> >recompile, although it is good practice to at least recompile the modules
> >when the kernel is recompiled.
> In my opinion the best way to handle things like this is to add a
> modules target to the kernel Makefile which would call
> src/sys/modules/Makefile and allow users who would perhaps never venture
> into src/sys except when heading straight for src/sys/i386/conf to
> easily update their modules.  It makes little sense to have modules
> under src/sys and in the src-sys collection if the only time they are
> routinely rebuilt is through a complete make world.  Isn't the idea of
> having a seperate Makefile for src/sys so that *all* kernel level code
> can be recompiled and/or updated without the user having to possess all
> of src or knowledge of the world process?  I know I'm not the first
> person to raise the issue, but I don't think I should be the last
> either.  I think it's a sound architectual decision and 100% inline with
> FreeBSD's commitment to accomodate users of all skill levels.
> Brandon D. Valentine
> -- 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]                         Illegitimi non carborundum.

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

Reply via email to