Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 5 Nov 1995 10:29:36 +0100 (MET)
From:      grog@lemis.de (Greg Lehey)
To:        graichen@sirius.physik.fu-berlin.de (Thomas Graichen)
Cc:        hackers@freebsd.org (FreeBSD Hackers)
Subject:   Re: machine reboot & kernel maxusers option
Message-ID:  <199511050929.KAA10493@allegro.lemis.de>
In-Reply-To: <9511050856.AA19879@sirius.physik.fu-berlin.de> from "Thomas Graichen" at Nov 5, 95 09:55:26 am

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thomas Graichen writes:
> 
> > As Amancio Hasty Jr. wrote:
> > 
> > > > > Should device drivers during boot time print messages of devices
> > >      not foun d ?
> > 
> > >  > Well, it is useful to see if one of your devices is not
> > >  found... and you're > not supposed to reboot that often (unless you
> > >  run -CURRENT that is).
> > 
> > > I don't buy that since at boot time all drivers print a message to the 
> > > effect that the device was found and configuration information.
> > 
> > I've been voting for hiding the ``not found'' messages behind the
> > "bootverbose" (boot -v) case long ago, but nobody seems to agree. :)
> >
>  
> i agree with you - i think this should be the sense of a "-v" flag - normally
> you should'ne see what's missing (if it is something impotant you'll see it if
> something is'nt working :-) - but you shoud have a chance to look more careful
> at all the device probes (using boot -v)

I'll go along with that.  "Not found" also scares off people who don't
realize that it's a normal state of affairs.

Greg



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199511050929.KAA10493>