Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:17:38 +0200 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> To: "Andrew Brampton" <brampton+freebsd-hackers@gmail.com> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org, Eugene Grosbein <eugen@kuzbass.ru> Subject: Re: Determine if a kernel is built with a specific option? Message-ID: <873afolcrh.fsf@kobe.laptop> In-Reply-To: <d41814900901120656s5d6f8f78te714fee01a6dff0f@mail.gmail.com> (Andrew Brampton's message of "Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:56:21 %2B0000") References: <d41814900901120355h780a3232u14fa1e5da8f280ad@mail.gmail.com> <a31046fc0901120500q5ab31adax903d32279894e23e@mail.gmail.com> <20090112145131.GA4375@svzserv.kemerovo.su> <d41814900901120656s5d6f8f78te714fee01a6dff0f@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:56:21 +0000, "Andrew Brampton" <brampton+freebsd-hackers@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you were going to do this, would you make it a configure flag... ie
> --enable-polling... That way it doesn't matter if the build box is
> different?
If both choices are available (i.e. no header files are missing, no
link-time libraries are unavailable, and so on), I'd probably make it a
runtime option:
* A configure-time flag to set the 'default' and
* A runtime option to explicitly specify the current preference when
the program runs.
This seems a bit more flexible, and does not require an expensive ``go
back to your vendor, and ask for a special build-time option'' cycle to
test different setups when a field installation is done.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?873afolcrh.fsf>