From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Dec 15 03:47:10 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id DAA20063 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 15 Dec 1997 03:47:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers) Received: from db2server.voga.com.br (db2server.voga.com.br [200.239.39.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA20057 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 1997 03:47:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from daniel_sobral@voga.com.br) From: daniel_sobral@voga.com.br Received: from papagaio.voga.com.br (papagaio.voga.com.br [200.239.39.2]) by db2server.voga.com.br (8.8.3+2.6Wbeta9/8.8.7) with SMTP id IAA12998; Mon, 15 Dec 1997 08:46:18 -0300 Received: by papagaio.voga.com.br(Lotus SMTP MTA v1.06 (346.7 3-18-1997)) id 0325656E.0040A429 ; Mon, 15 Dec 1997 08:46:03 -0300 X-Lotus-FromDomain: VOGA To: tlambert@primenet.com cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Message-ID: <8325656E.003FF988.00@papagaio.voga.com.br> Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 08:45:43 -0300 Subject: Re: Why so many steps to build new kernel? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > The idea that there needs to be a mechanism for handling mutual > exclusions presupposes (incorrectly, IMO), that some drivers are > mutually exclusive. Well, as far as I know, syscon and the vt stuff are mutually exclusive. And, generally, speaking, two drivers to the same piece of hardware will be mutually exclusive. That's not that unlikely to ignore the possibility. > Similarly, prerequisite identification is well and good, but can be > done symbolically, without reference to a kernel configurator. Similarly, the kernel configurator should not display syscon's history buffer size option if you did not select syscon. > So what's left for a kernel configurator to do? > ...Nothing. In a perfect world, with elf kernel, PnP PCI devices, devfs, and well behaviored hardware, sure, nothing's left to do. (except that, there probably would be even then)