From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Jun 24 3:25:18 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from ringworld.nanolink.com (beleriand.online.bg [217.75.129.181]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1147037B407 for ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 03:25:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from roam@orbitel.bg) Received: (qmail 2080 invoked by uid 1000); 24 Jun 2001 10:23:29 -0000 Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 13:23:29 +0300 From: Peter Pentchev To: John Baldwin Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org, Valentin Nechayev , Terry Lambert Subject: Re: Two Junior Kernel Hacker tasks.. Message-ID: <20010624132329.A507@ringworld.oblivion.bg> Mail-Followup-To: John Baldwin , hackers@FreeBSD.org, Valentin Nechayev , Terry Lambert References: <20010623225526.A564@ringworld.oblivion.bg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from jhb@FreeBSD.org on Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 10:44:51PM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 10:44:51PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > On 23-Jun-01 Peter Pentchev wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 12:23:35PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: > >> > make buildkernel is rather easy way to work it around: in > >> > any case object tree is machine-dependent, and one yet > >> > another directory does not destroy anything. ;| > >> > >> The "make buildkernel" approach sucks for incremental > >> builds, since you are unable to avoid the "config" run > >> each time, and a lot of unnecessary stuff gets compiled > >> again because of opt_*.h files whose contents have not > >> changed (even if you defeat the clean of the compile > >> directory). > > > > About the release process, you are right, it is a bit harder > > to restart without some tweaks, but the buildkernel target > > is about as restartable as it can be. (I really don't think > > anyone would ever advocate skipping the config(8) or > > the 'make depend' stage..) > > Actually, make depend takes a relatively long time, and when > I'm hacking on a kernel, I don't want to wait 15 minutes to > build a kernel after changing one file. I compile kernels > w/o config or make depend a lot. OK, so if you're really really sure your changes do not affect the dependency graph, use -DNOKERNELDEPEND :) G'luck, Peter -- This sentence contains exactly threee erors. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message