On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 07:33:03PM +0100, mouss wrote:
> I work for a commercial company, and I did what I could to convince
> people that *BSD is the way, and we're happily using FreeBSD.
> now, we modiy the kernel sources, and this is a problem since this changes
> the way people build the kernel.
> what we did is provide procedures to modify the kernel config file (GENERIC
> for example), conf/files and so, in order to build the kernel.
> While this is ok, it doesn't sound perfect to me. I'd love it if thrid party
> modifications were intended in the kernel sources. I'm ready to do the work.
> mainly, I'd propose some patches to config so that thrid party
> additions/modifications
> are made easier [the real problem is that when many companies modify the
> kernel.
> If they all do it as we do, then it's impossible. but if it's provided by
> the system, then
> it's easier].
If your company's infrastrucutre changes are made in a way that if
the project adopted them it would help binary support, I'm sure that would
be accepted.
ie. if we just made function foo() more generic and then you could
simply provide a KLD, that would make everyones life easier.
Sometimes these things aren't that simple, though. :-<
--
Bill Fumerola - security yahoo / Yahoo! inc.
- [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
