Re: policy on GPL'd drivers?

On Wed, 28 May 2003 18:44, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> : 1) If the port is updated between builds you end up with two version of
> : the port installed.
>
> True.  That's a weakness in the ports system, which is why we have
> portupgrade.  However, I didn't want to require portupgrade for
> something so 'simple'.

To a degree, but IMHO it isn't correct - I don't want to update the version of 
the port I am using without good reason. ie it should just recompile the code 
for the port you've already installed which is usually sufficient to get 
things working again.

> : 2) You can't control where the module gets put - arguably this isn't a
> : calamity, but I think it makes more sense for the modules to end up in
> : /boot/modules, or some analog to it that is in $PREFIX.
>
> It should go in /boot/kernel, and not into $PREFIX, but that's a
> philisophical problem I have with ports.  ALL modules should be in /,
> imho, since you don't know if the module is required to mount /.

Yes, I agree.

> : I guess the problem with mandating somewhere in $PREFIX is that the
> : loader can't load it, so that's no good. I guess the only choice left is
> : /boot/modules.
>
> /boot/kernel
>
> : Any comments?
>
> Well, the patch was mostly a strawman to promote discussions about the
> issues.

Fair enough.

I think the port should install the source for the module in $PREFIX somewhere 
(well known) and the module should live in /boot/kernel.

When things need rebuilding it uses the installed source to do so..

-- 
Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer
for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au
"The nice thing about standards is that there
are so many of them to choose from."
  -- Andrew Tanenbaum
GPG Fingerprint - 9A8C 569F 685A D928 5140  AE4B 319B 41F4 5D17 FDD5