Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 17:33:57 +0200 From: Neil Blakey-Milner <nbm@mithrandr.moria.org> To: "Chad R. Larson" <chad@DCFinc.com> Cc: Wolfgang Zenker <wolfgang@lyxys.ka.sub.org>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Innacurate statements in handbook about buildkernel Message-ID: <20000727173356.A49050@mithrandr.moria.org> In-Reply-To: <200007270327.UAA23756@freeway.dcfinc.com>; from chad@DCFinc.com on Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 08:27:31PM -0700 References: <m13Hd2e-000kRFC@lyxys.ka.sub.org> <200007270327.UAA23756@freeway.dcfinc.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed 2000-07-26 (20:27), Chad R. Larson wrote: > As I recall, Wolfgang Zenker wrote: > > But isn't the whole point of the buildkernel method to build the > > kernel using the new tools you just created in /usr/obj? If i got > > this right i think you actually WANT a buildkernel without an existing > > /usr/obj to fail, hopefully with a message to please make buildworld > > first. > > That's how it sounds to me. That's wrong. 'make buildkernel' should DTRT in all situations. Maybe it doesn't yet, but it should. > We've also created a situation where space-limited folks =can't= > update just kernel sources. As I said originally, one doesn't need a populated /usr/obj to do a 'make buildkernel', with only one minor exception. Also note we officially "don't support" out-of-sync kernel and userland, but we do allow people to shoot themselves in the foot. > Or be pretty smart about the innards of the build process and the > filesystem layout--exactly the skills the person who installed kernel > sources only 'cause he wanted to make a customized kernel won't have. That's why 'make buildkernel' should always work. Neil -- Neil Blakey-Milner Sunesi Clinical Systems nbm@mithrandr.moria.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000727173356.A49050>