On Mon, Aug 08, 2022 at 07:18:05AM -0700, Paul Goyette wrote: > It really seems to me that the current module sub-systems is at > best a second-class capability. I often get the feeling that > others don't really care about modules, until it's the only way > to provide something else (dtrace).
To reply to this point - I'm very interested in modules, but it doesn't meet a basic requirement for me - easily going back to a previous kernel when the new one is broken for some reason - if they share the same kernel version, they share the same /stand/amd64/9.99.99/modules directory, and if the problem is there, I'm stuck. Also, I'm not clear on what the new workflow is for my old one: Update kernel: A. build.sh kernel=NAME ln -f /netbsd /netbsd.old install ..../netbsd /netbsd reboot B. build.sh what? ln -f /netbsd /netbsd.old ? something for old modules ? install .../netbsd /netbsd ? something for new modules, are they even built? ? reboot If the kernel is broken somehow A. drop to boot prompt boot /netbsd.old B. drop to bootprompt ? What do I do to tell the old kernel where its old modules are ? boot /netbsd.old I think /netbsd/ as a directory including a kernel and modules would be a solution. I think christos? proposed it at some point and but it never happened. Thomas
