Re: NTFS in GENERIC: opt-in or opt-out?

From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk_at_phk.freebsd.dk>
> In message <790a9fff0901190108r4eb3232bqfc6a0c8af8cd7c71_at_mail.gmail.com>, 
> Scot
> Hetzel writes:
>>On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 2:35 AM, Maxim Sobolev <sobomax_at_freebsd.org> 
>>wrote:
>>> Erich Dollansky wrote:
>
>>> Any particular reason why not? Memory is cheap, 100-200KB of extra 
>>> kernel
>>> code doesn't really matter today, while NTFS is probably the most 
>>> widespread
>>> filesystem after MSDOS. Therefore supporting it in the GENERIC out of 
>>> the
>>> box even in the read-only mode (our NTFS driver is read-only AFAIK) 
>>> could
>>> benefit many users.
>
>>Since a buildkernel will install the ntfs.ko kernel module by default,
>>their is no need to have the NTFS filesystem complied into GENERIC.
>
> Seconded, we should move towards a mode modular kernel, not less.

    What about making MINIMAL, TYPICAL, and KITCHENSINK kernel config file?

    To be honest, I dont know of a single machine that I have setup that
actually runs on the generic kernel for any length of time aside from
installing. If I had my drothers, I would like the generic kernel to be as
fully packed as possible because I tend to use the probe messages on boot as
a guide-line for what things I will keep from the generic config. I tend to
copy the generic config and then start hacking it up from there. That said,
NTFS is something I would not use during the install but for those users
that do run there machine off the GENERIC kernel gotten through whatever way
they installed, it may prove to be a bit annoying to not have all the bells
and whistles in by default.

Peg