Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> * Peter Wemm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010207 06:29] wrote:
> > "Leif Neland" wrote:
> > > While the error-messages are clear, I don't remember seeing any heads-up,
> >     mentioning of this in UPDATING
> > > 
> > > Or is it just me...?
> > 
> > No, there wasn't one..  The commit message was pretty clear - You are
> > reading them, right?  We usually do HEAD UP's for stuff that will break
> > people pretty badly or get them in trouble (eg: an unviable kernel if the
> > instructions are not followed).
> > 
> > At least you got the message.  buildkernel would have silently ignored this
> > up until recently.
> Does this mean that 'FFS' isn't optional anymore?  I mean it probably
> hasn't been (or never was) but the intention was that to build 4.4BSD
> you needed _either_ UFS or INET, but you could ditch either one and
> still build a kernel.

No, FFS_ROOT was unused.  We have a generic mountroot mechanism, so we no
longer needed to compile the "special" FFS-specific version of the code
into autoconf.c.  FFS is still optional.  For i386 FFS_ROOT and CD9660_ROOT
did nothing, and on alpha/ia64 it did something that was more likely to
cause problems than help.

"All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5

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

Reply via email to