Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 12:27:21 +0000 (GMT) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: dick hoogendijk <dick@nagual.st> Cc: ru@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Fw: GENERIC and DEFAULTS Message-ID: <20051103122636.S66191@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <20051103132400.1f983424.dick@nagual.st> References: <075001c5dff5$e859fbc0$8adb7bd1@icarz.com> <43693D43.2000400@crc.u-strasbg.fr> <20051103132400.1f983424.dick@nagual.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, dick hoogendijk wrote: > Sure, but I think it's the *syntax* that matters here? options -> > nooptions / i486_cpu -> no??? It's OK to leave GENERIC alone, but HOW > are things switched off? It appears to be an ommission in the file format. I've e-mailed Ruslan, who implemented nodevice and nooption, to suggest that he also add nocpu. I wonder if there are other missed syntactic bits of note. Robert N M Watson
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051103122636.S66191>