> 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.
Perfect for your purposes. I, as user (and with some machines
running on FreeBSD), want to be able to rebuild the kernel at any
time, and fix myself when needed. I don't want any binary packages
that can cause trouble and delay days.
> 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
You mean some base support in makefiles to make patching easier?
In general: No problem with that.
In specific cases: No.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
