Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 10 Jul 1996 17:21:09 -0400
From:      dennis@etinc.com (Dennis)
To:        Nik Clayton <nik@blueberry.co.uk>
Cc:        hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Some recent changes to GENERIC
Message-ID:  <199607102121.RAA11178@etinc.com>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> Having worked with BSD/*nix systems since the mid-80's, as I understand
>> it GENERIC wasn't intened to be a 'minimal' kernel with as little wasted
>> space as possible, but a 'kitchen-sink' kernel which contained every
>> conceivable driver so that you could never had to build a custom kernel
>
>With this in mind, would it not make sense to have a fairly minimal kernel
>on the boot floppy, and include a larger, and more complete 'GENERIC' as
>part of the bindist?
>
>That way you get the best of both worlds.

Isnt the idea that the generic kernel will boot on a wide variety of 
of machines regardless of the cards installed?

Is it impossible to have 2 kernels, one generic and one compact? 
(2 separate boot floppies). It would be cool to be able to boot on 
a low memory system.

Dennis
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emerging Technologies, Inc.      http://www.etinc.com

Synchronous Communications Cards and Routers For
Discriminating Tastes. 56k to T1 and beyond. Frame
Relay, PPP, HDLC, and X.25 for BSD/OS, FreeBSD 
and LINUX




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199607102121.RAA11178>