On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 08:10:34PM -0500, Wesley Morgan wrote:
> I just noted that my kernel modules seem to be building with CFLAGS
> instead of COPTFLAGS as I would expect. Is this intentional? I always
> build my kernel with more "safe" optimization, and figured that the
> modules would naturall
>Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 23:24:27 -0400
>From: Vladimir Savichev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>it's apparently fixed, check it in cvs-all
>May 12 Bill Paul cvs commit: src/sys/modules/nge Makefile src/sys/dev
Yes; applying that pair of patches allows today's -CURRENT to build -- and
run: I'm running it
it's apparently fixed, check it in cvs-all
May 12 Bill Paul cvs commit: src/sys/modules/nge Makefile src/sys/dev
-- Vlad
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 08:38:34PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
> would that nullfs worked!
It does, modulo remaining bugs which Boris hasnt yet fixed.
Kris
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 10:04:34PM -0400, John DeBoskey wrote:
>Question, is /modules still valid?
Yes. It should be used for 3rd party modules only.
--
-- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the mess
On Wed, 17 May 2000 18:41:29 +0100, Brian Somers wrote:
> 1. To update things, I was under the impression that ``make buildworld
>buildkernel'' then ``make installworld installkernel'' was the idea.
>This doesn't build modules, but building from sys/compile/whatever
>builds anot
According to Garrett Wollman:
> It's listening on a kernel notification socket. (Implementation is an
> exercise left for the reader, but there are already a few examples.)
Like the routing socket I guess ?
Or we could implement POLLSYSCTL ? :-)
/me hides and runs
--
Ollivier ROBERT -=- Free
"Jordan K. Hubbard" wrote:
>
> > In other words, it's not a problem specific to KLD's .. but
> > it's still a problem :-)
>
> Which raises an important issue - other than walking the sysctl tree
> regularly looking for changes, how does such an application become
> aware that the sysctl space h
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jul
ian Elischer writes:
[sysctlfs]
>Linux have basically done this in their procfs.
And have recently started to wonder if that wasn't a mistake I've heard.
I would regard sysctlfs as a grave mistake.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member
[E
On Sat, 11 Dec 1999, Julian Elischer wrote:
> Linux have basically done this in their procfs.
If we're looking for a gross hack, we need look no further :-)
Kris
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Linux have basically done this in their procfs.
On Sat, 11 Dec 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> > Use a similar hack: map the sysctl tree to the filesystem (ala kernfs) and
> > then stat the directory nodes.
>
> AAIEE! sysctlfs!! :-)
>
> It's an interesting idea and I'm not sure why it a
"Jordan K. Hubbard" wrote:
>
> > In other words, it's not a problem specific to KLD's .. but
> > it's still a problem :-)
>
> Which raises an important issue - other than walking the sysctl tree
> regularly looking for changes, how does such an application become
> aware that the sysctl space h
< said:
> Which raises an important issue - other than walking the sysctl tree
> regularly looking for changes, how does such an application become
> aware that the sysctl space has changed?
It's listening on a kernel notification socket. (Implementation is an
exercise left for the reader, but
> Use a similar hack: map the sysctl tree to the filesystem (ala kernfs) and
> then stat the directory nodes.
AAIEE! sysctlfs!! :-)
It's an interesting idea and I'm not sure why it also horrifies me at
some inner, almost cellular, level. If somebody's actually willing to
do the work of cre
> Perhaps a modtime on the sysctl tree as a gross hack? Inside of sysctl() and
> the SYSCTL() macros you would update the time every time a write was made, no
de
> added, node removed, etc. However, it is a gross hack.
You're right, it would be a gross hack. :) Also, I can see where it
would b
> other than walking the sysctl tree regularly looking for changes
Use a similar hack: map the sysctl tree to the filesystem (ala kernfs) and
then stat the directory nodes.
John
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
On 11-Dec-99 Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
>> In other words, it's not a problem specific to KLD's .. but
>> it's still a problem :-)
>
> Which raises an important issue - other than walking the sysctl tree
> regularly looking for changes, how does such an application become
> aware that the sysctl
> In other words, it's not a problem specific to KLD's .. but
> it's still a problem :-)
Which raises an important issue - other than walking the sysctl tree
regularly looking for changes, how does such an application become
aware that the sysctl space has changed? The same holds true for a
dyn
Jordan K. Hubbard writes:
> > I think the latter. In 'theory' there should be no discernable
> > difference between functionality from a KLD vs. the same functionality
> > compiled directly into the kernel.
>
> Only in theory, of course. :)
>
> As Andrzej has already pointed out, modules can als
> I think the latter. In 'theory' there should be no discernable
> difference between functionality from a KLD vs. the same functionality
> compiled directly into the kernel.
Only in theory, of course. :)
As Andrzej has already pointed out, modules can also be loaded and
unloaded, creating a sys
Andrzej Bialecki writes:
> > KLD's are just a linking mechanism, and shouldn't have any more
> > significance than that from a usability perspective.
>
> Hah. If it were so simple...
>
> Let's take the example of a module foo, which provides unique features of
> bar and baz. They are unrelated t
On Thu, 9 Dec 1999, Archie Cobbs wrote:
> Andrzej Bialecki writes:
> > I'd like to know whether we reached some conclusions concerning the naming
> > of sysctl variables created (or related to) KLDs. I know that Linux
> > emulator creates "compat.linux". I don't know if any other module creates
>
Andrzej Bialecki writes:
> I'd like to know whether we reached some conclusions concerning the naming
> of sysctl variables created (or related to) KLDs. I know that Linux
> emulator creates "compat.linux". I don't know if any other module creates
> sysctls (well, except my SPY module.. :-).
>
>
> thanks, committed.
> For thise wondering this is a netgraph node that can do arbitrary
> filtering using the existing bpf engine.
And just when is ipfw going to become a netgraph node 0.5 * :-)
God I wish I had some free time to go play with this code!!
> On Fri, 3 Dec 1999, Steven G. Karg
On 03-Dec-99 Nick Hibma wrote:
> Has anyone ever devised a good way to put a module in a port?
Well the skip port creates a module..
> Maybe it is the more general question of how to relate modules to
> other parts of the base system, like the kernel, downloadable firmware
> files, etc.
Ur
thanks, committed.
For thise wondering this is a netgraph node that can do arbitrary
filtering using the existing bpf engine.
On Fri, 3 Dec 1999, Steven G. Kargl wrote:
>
> *** Makefile.orig Fri Dec 3 16:46:54 1999
> --- Makefile Fri Dec 3 16:46:25 1999
> ***
> *** 6,11
Did you do a config of your kernel after updating? opt_linux.h is
generated by config.
Nick
On Tue, 30 Nov 1999, Kenneth Culver wrote:
> I tried to rebuild the linux kernel module, but it doesn't work:
>
> Warning: Object directory not changed from original
> /usr/src/sys/modules/linux
> cc -
That's not what I said.
> I just cvsupped about 2 hours ago...
>
> On Tue, 30 Nov 1999, Mike Smith wrote:
>
> > > I tried to rebuild the linux kernel module, but it doesn't work:
> >
> > This is -current. You need to stay up to date.
> >
> > --
> > \\ Give a man a fish, and you feed him for
I just cvsupped about 2 hours ago...
=
| Kenneth Culver | FreeBSD: The best OS around.|
| Unix Systems Administrator | ICQ #: 24767726 |
| and student at The | AIM: AgRSkaterq
> I tried to rebuild the linux kernel module, but it doesn't work:
This is -current. You need to stay up to date.
--
\\ Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. \\ Mike Smith
\\ Tell him he should learn how to fish himself, \\ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
\\ and he'll hate you for a lifetime.
Worked like a charm, thanks...have fxp0 and procfs removed from my kernel
config and using modules...
On Fri, 8 Oct 1999, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
> The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> >
> > Just to confirm, *technically*, I should just have to comment out the
> > options PROCFS in my kernel config, reb
The Hermit Hacker wrote:
>
> Just to confirm, *technically*, I should just have to comment out the
> options PROCFS in my kernel config, rebuild and reboot and since procfs
> isn't in the kernel, it will look for it as a module?
As long as the module is up to date.
--
Daniel C. Sobral
>
> On 08-Oct-99 Mike Smith wrote:
> > > Yes.. That should work fine..
> > > In fact you can have all your FS's as modules except what / is..
> > You can have / too, as long as you load it with the loader. 8)
>
> And providing / is UFS because thats all the loader understands (?)
No, it could
On 08-Oct-99 Mike Smith wrote:
> > Yes.. That should work fine..
> > In fact you can have all your FS's as modules except what / is..
> You can have / too, as long as you load it with the loader. 8)
And providing / is UFS because thats all the loader understands (?)
---
Daniel O'Connor softwa
>
> On 07-Oct-99 The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> > Just to confirm, *technically*, I should just have to comment out the
> > options PROCFS in my kernel config, rebuild and reboot and since procfs
> > isn't in the kernel, it will look for it as a module?
>
> Yes.. That should work fine..
> In fact
On 07-Oct-99 The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> Just to confirm, *technically*, I should just have to comment out the
> options PROCFS in my kernel config, rebuild and reboot and since procfs
> isn't in the kernel, it will look for it as a module?
Yes.. That should work fine..
In fact you can have al
On Thu, 7 Oct 1999, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>
> On 07-Oct-99 Greg Lehey wrote:
> > Well, the standard way to load a kld is with kldload(1) or kldload(2).
> > I don't know if procfs works properly like this, though.
>
> Well I would assume (aha) that when mount cannot find procfs in the list of
On Thu, 7 Oct 1999, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
> The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> >
> > Figuring one of the things a friend of mine raves about Linux for is their
> > kld's, I'd start playing with ours...
> >
> > Looking in /modules, I saw 'procfs', so, cool, a place to start...remove
> > "options PROCF
The Hermit Hacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Figuring one of the things a friend of mine raves about Linux for is their
> kld's, I'd start playing with ours...
[ Going off on a slight tangent ... ]
You may have gone beyond this, but a good introduction to klds is
an article called, "Atta
> The network ones, for instance. No more need to put in the device lines
> in the kernel configuration file, it will be automagically loaded by
> ifconfig. I don't know if this is working already or not, though.
It works in -CURRENT for most PCI network devices (`de' is one notable
exception).
On Thu, 07 Oct 1999 03:00:52 -0300, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> checked the kld man page, and nothing in there appears to be
> appropriate...
You should have checked the SEE ALSO secion of the manpage (I wonder
whether Ruslan Ermilov is reading?) *grin*
SEE ALSO
kldfind(2), kldfirstmod(2
The Hermit Hacker wrote:
>
> Figuring one of the things a friend of mine raves about Linux for is their
> kld's, I'd start playing with ours...
>
> Looking in /modules, I saw 'procfs', so, cool, a place to start...remove
> "options PROCFS" from kernel config, rebuild, install and reboot ...
>
>
On 07-Oct-99 Greg Lehey wrote:
> Well, the standard way to load a kld is with kldload(1) or kldload(2).
> I don't know if procfs works properly like this, though.
Well I would assume (aha) that when mount cannot find procfs in the list of
FS's the kernel knows about it would try and load it ju
> Well, the standard way to load a kld is with kldload(1) or kldload(2).
> I don't know if procfs works properly like this, though.
Procfs works just fine:
[groovy] /usr/src.With_secure_NFS # kldstat
Id Refs AddressSize Name
17 0xc010 1a10cc kernel.debug
21 0xc09c1000 300
On Thursday, 7 October 1999 at 3:00:52 -0300, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
>
> Figuring one of the things a friend of mine raves about Linux for is their
> kld's, I'd start playing with ours...
Yes, it's funny how the Linuxers rave about loadable modules. It's a
good idea, but I don't see anything
On 07-Oct-99 The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> Looking in /modules, I saw 'procfs', so, cool, a place to start...remove
> "options PROCFS" from kernel config, rebuild, install and reboot ...
> so, I figure that I somehow have to tell the kernel to load that module?
Well its a kld.. You don't have to
46 matches
Mail list logo
