From owner-freebsd-current Sat Oct 2 20:10:29 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from overcee.netplex.com.au (overcee.netplex.com.au [202.12.86.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68B1E15392 for ; Sat, 2 Oct 1999 20:10:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@netplex.com.au) Received: from netplex.com.au (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by overcee.netplex.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3DBB1CB0; Sun, 3 Oct 1999 11:09:56 +0800 (WST) (envelope-from peter@netplex.com.au) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: "Daniel C. Sobral" Cc: "Rodney W. Grimes" , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: new sigset_t and upgrading: a proposal In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 03 Oct 1999 02:43:26 +0900." <37F6443E.D1F5A19A@newsguy.com> Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 11:09:56 +0800 From: Peter Wemm Message-Id: <19991003030956.C3DBB1CB0@overcee.netplex.com.au> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG "Daniel C. Sobral" wrote: > "Rodney W. Grimes" wrote: > > > > These folks are 100% correct, some place some where we made a mistake > > and are telling users to do things in the wrong order. It might have > > even been myself that caused this, I just can't recall when and who > > said to build the world before building the kernel. But now looking > > at it in hindsight, this is plainly the wrong sequence, and we should > > correct that error as soon as possible. > > > > When did we go wrong and start saying that users should build the world > > before building a new kernel? If it was ``I'' that said it, I full > > retract any such statement, I was WRONG!. It may have been said in the > > patchkit days, or very early FreeBSD 1.x. > > It might have something to do with kernel's dependency on the tools > installed by world, such as gas, gcc and config. In the case of gcc/gas/ld etc we should be able to work around that. If the inline asm statements break on older gcc, then we should ifdef them to work the way they used to before egcs required they be changed. For things like config etc, that particular problem is almost over. It does very VERY little now and I can't see that we'll have incompatable changes (apart from shooting it and using a lightweight kernel/module build organizer/manager/whatever). All config(8) does at present is three things: 1: build the Makefile and options files 2: extract fragments of the static configuration and export it in MI format for the bootstrap. 3: get in the way. Thinks like libkvm, w, ps, top etc are usually best left till after a 'trial by fire' of the new kernel IMHO. Maybe a 'make afterkernel' or something to rebuild "the usual culprits" to automate that so it doesn't require a complete world as often. Just some thoughts that might make things easier... Cheers, -Peter To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message