Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 21:25:58 -0400 From: "Donald J. Maddox" <root@cola43.scsn.net> To: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD 2.1.7 and COMPAT_43 -Reply Message-ID: <19970513212558.50689@cola43.scsn.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96.970513181138.25959B-100000@narcissus.ml.org>; from Snob Art Genre on Tue, May 13, 1997 at 06:16:43PM -0700 References: <19970513194659.14359@cola68.scsn.net> <Pine.NEB.3.96.970513181138.25959B-100000@narcissus.ml.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, May 13, 1997 at 06:16:43PM -0700, Snob Art Genre wrote:
> What if I am a programmer who for some reason wants an "INET"-less kernel?
> The way the system is now, I can take out the INET option and then fix all
> the holes left by its absence. Under your system, I would also have to
> hack config(8).
>
> Perhaps the existing system should have more obvious documentation -- on
> my 2.1.7 system neither INET nor COMPAT_43 are marked as mandatory in
> GENERIC nor in LINT.
Ok... But since an INET-less kernel is clearly the exception, wouldn't
it make more sense to have an 'INETLESS' kernel option rather than
an 'INET' option that is really not an option for most people?
--
Donald J. Maddox
(dmaddox@scsn.net)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970513212558.50689>