Date: Sat, 7 May 2016 07:41:59 +0000 From: Glen Barber <gjb@FreeBSD.org> To: "Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya)" <yaneurabeya@gmail.com> Cc: Ben Woods <woodsb02@gmail.com>, "freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org" <freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase Message-ID: <20160507074159.GC47527@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <7018EDCD-A567-446D-965C-9E886D543238@gmail.com> References: <CAOc73CC6WoFHPDBa6LGMyhmnA1ZjiemffyTJBGBNSZwPOu8KzA@mail.gmail.com> <20160506221151.GN1362@FreeBSD.org> <CAOc73CACQUhx2rGuC1ftcpuk=LeOv8fEpnR0A2PPRGVo31RYRg@mail.gmail.com> <7018EDCD-A567-446D-965C-9E886D543238@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--YD3LsXFS42OYHhNZ
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 12:35:10AM -0700, Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya) wrote:
> (Replying because I kicked the hornet=E2=80=99s nest when my build failed)
> Hi Ben,
>=20
> > On May 7, 2016, at 00:27, Ben Woods <woodsb02@gmail.com> wrote:
> >=20
> > On Saturday, 7 May 2016, Glen Barber <gjb@freebsd.org> wrote:
> >=20
> >> With 'installkernel', the first kernel listed in KERNCONF is installed
> >> as the default (/boot/kernel), and subsequent kernels are installed wi=
th
> >> the kernel name included in the path (/boot/kernel.${INSTKERNNAME}). =
In
> >> both cases (source-based upgrades and with pkgbase), the behavior will
> >> remain the same.
> >>=20
> >> Glen
> >>=20
> >=20
> > Hi Glen,
> >=20
> > With the recent commit mentioned previously, only the first kernel list=
ed
> > in KERNCONF is installed unless make.conf contains the following line:
> > NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS=3Dno
> >=20
> > This affects both source-based upgrades (make installkernel) and package
> > building (make packages).
> >=20
> > Is this the desired behaviour?
>=20
> The naming is very confusing. It should be:
>=20
> - MK_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS=3Dno -> only install one
> - MK_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS=3Dyes -> install multiple, as gjb@ described abo=
ve.
>=20
> Since I kicked the hornet=E2=80=99s nest (and imp@ complained about the
> NO_*), I=E2=80=99ll introduce a new WITH/WITHOUT option for this and
> release/release.sh can use it.
>=20
I think this raises a larger question - did "something" change that
otherwise violates POLA? The commit recently was intended to revert
a POLA violation, so maybe I am not entirely clear on what branch this
affects.
Are we talking about head or stable/10 here?
Glen
--YD3LsXFS42OYHhNZ
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2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=kccu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--YD3LsXFS42OYHhNZ--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160507074159.GC47527>