Re: RFC: separate 3dfx_linux module

On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 03:11:02PM -0500, Coleman Kane wrote:
> I have unfortunately lost all of my voodoo hardware.
> 
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 09:17:24AM -0700, Scott Long wrote:
> > Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> > >Hi there,
> > >
> > >In the course of reviewing and cleaning up the default configuration
> > >of kernel options, it was suggested by the Release Engineers that
> > >we had a separate module for TDFX_LINUX instead of placing the
> > >burden on the device tdfx and module 3dfx.  Could anybody interested
> > >test this change?  I've made sure it builds, but I have no 3dfx hw
> > >to really test it.  The testing is as simple as building the new
> > >3dfx and 3dfx_linux modules, loading them, and verifying that the
> > >linux apps work with the device as before.  Thanks in advance!
> > >
> 
> Sounds goo to me. I am all for further modularization of the codebase.

Thanks!

> > Why keep the TDFX_LINUX option defined in sys/conf/options?
> 
> Sounds good to me. In the event that you want to build this statically
> into the kernel, doesn't the option still need to be available,
> or are we talking about a device tdfxlinux ?

It was exactly my point, too: the TDFX_LINUX option has to be there
so that people still can compile device tdfx with Linux support into
the main kernel file.

-- 
Yar