Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 24 Apr 2000 09:20:25 -0400
From:      "Jeroen C. van Gelderen" <jeroen@vangelderen.org>
To:        Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@dataplex.net>
Cc:        Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: SMP changes and breaking kld object module compatibility
Message-ID:  <39044A19.F6F4E479@vangelderen.org>
References:  <200004231909.MAA09128@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> <00042315420301.24082@nomad.dataplex.net> <200004240605.XAA66216@apollo.backplane.com> <00042404464300.09955@nomad.dataplex.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Richard Wackerbarth wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 24 Apr 2000, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> > : However, I consider your SMP changes VERY destablizing; they BREAK
> > : lots of modules :-(
> >
> >     Huh?  No they don't.  They simply require recompiling the modules.  If
> >     they actually broke the modules I wouldn't be trying to MFC it to
> >     -stable.
> 
> >From the USER's perspective, anything that requires me to as much as reload
> a module/program that I have already installed "breaks" it.
> The fact that it is only necessary to recompile it in order to fix it only
> means that it is easy to fix IF I have the source code.

I don't think it was ever recommended that you upgrade your kernel
without upgrading and rebuilding the modules (better still, world) at
the same time. So this wouldn't really have an adverse effect, would it?

Cheers,
Jeroen


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?39044A19.F6F4E479>