From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Mar 7 8:56: 1 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F32F737B401 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 08:56:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from server.merchantsbarter.com (server.merchantsbarter.com [198.78.66.185]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9896943F3F for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 08:56:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from damien@tougas.net) Received: from buddy.home.tougas.net (bangor44.hypernet.com [208.229.12.44]) by server.merchantsbarter.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 529E2102C for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2003 08:55:59 -0800 (PST) From: Damien Tougas To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: A question about kernel modules Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 11:55:43 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200303071155.43785.damien@tougas.net> Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Is there any advantage/disadvantage to using kernel moduls vs. staticly linking stuff in the kernel? I would like to eliminate everything from my kernel config that can be loaded as a module, then load them at boot using loader.conf. Is there any reason I would not want to do that? It seems to me that it would make things much easier. Why does FreeBSD not do this by default for the GENERIC kernel? Thanks. -- Damien Tougas To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message