Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 01:04:24 +0200 From: Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no> To: Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@dataplex.net>, Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: elf vs. bsd.*.mk Message-ID: <19980531010424.07998@follo.net> In-Reply-To: <l0313030ab195dc7dcd91@[208.2.87.10]>; from Richard Wackerbarth on Sat, May 30, 1998 at 04:15:39PM -0500 References: <199805302042.GAA13569@godzilla.zeta.org.au> <l0313030ab195dc7dcd91@[208.2.87.10]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, May 30, 1998 at 04:15:39PM -0500, Richard Wackerbarth wrote:
> At 8:42 PM -0000 5/30/98, Bruce Evans wrote:
> I SHOULD be able to simultaneously compile, from the same source tree,
> systems for two different machine architectures and/or variations
> of compile parameters.
Hmmm. There are two things missing to be able to do this:
o Automated generation of kernels
o Reading of make.conf from ${MAKE_CONF} if it exists, instead of
using /etc/make.conf always.
The latter is a trivial patch to sys.mk (or possibly to the bsd.*.mk
after Peter has fixed the use of bsd.own.mk).
Apart from the above, we already have control of the various variants
through the use of SUBDIR_CHANGE (which I haven't yet tested if works
through the buildworld target - I suspect it doesn't. Ah, silly me)
and OBJDIR.
And, of course, we're missing the ability to actually do a compile for
more than one architecture _at all_, given our lack of alternate
architectures.
Of course, the present way of specifying all of this isn't the best
imaginable, but it _is_ possible. I'm imagining SUBDIR_CHANGE to be
used mostly through a higher-level interface in the future.
Eivind.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980531010424.07998>