On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 9:31 AM, Warner Losh <i...@bsdimp.com> wrote: > On 12/27/2010 19:09, Steve Kargl wrote: >> >> On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 06:02:57PM -0800, Colin Percival wrote: >>> >>> On 12/27/10 17:59, Steve Kargl wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 11:52:40PM +0000, Colin Percival wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Make it possible to specify WITHOUT_MODULES in a kernel config file. >>>> >>>> Can you explain how this differs from >>>> makeoptions NO_MODULES >>>> which has been able to do for years? >>> >>> NO_MODULES means what it says: No modules. >>> >>> WITHOUT_MODULES="foo bar baz" means "go ahead and build modules except >>> for foo, >>> bar, and baz". >>> >> Thanks. The distincion wasn't clear from the commit log. >> I read it as "Build a kernel WITHOUT building MODULES", >> which is what NO_MODULES does. > > which is why I'd like to have its name changed: it is confusing this way...
Wouldn't it be better to have MODULES_EXCLUDE and MODULES_INCLUDE or something along those lines? MODULES_OVERRIDE doesn't really have a nice clean antonym to go with it according to my friendly neighborhood thesaurus. Thanks, -Garrett _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"