Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 14:14:41 -0700 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r219181 - head/release Message-ID: <F4365559-D893-44D8-8AD3-C56276BE14C4@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <201103031432.36336.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <201103021606.p22G6vou020460@svn.freebsd.org> <201103031209.43857.jhb@freebsd.org> <4D6FCE64.3010302@freebsd.org> <201103031432.36336.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mar 3, 2011, at 12:32 PM, John Baldwin wrote: > On Thursday, March 03, 2011 12:22:44 pm Nathan Whitehorn wrote: >> On 03/03/11 11:09, John Baldwin wrote: >>> On Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:06:57 am Nathan Whitehorn wrote: >>>> Author: nwhitehorn >>>> Date: Wed Mar 2 16:06:57 2011 >>>> New Revision: 219181 >>>> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/219181 >>>>=20 >>>> Log: >>>> Add additional release makefile for bsdinstall-based media, along = with >>>> support files. This does not change the default behavior of = anything. >>>>=20 >>>> To make bsdinstall-based media, pre-build world and GENERIC, then = run >>>> the release target in Makefile.bsdinstall. >>> Are you planning on keeping the current 'make release' behavior of = building a >>> full chroot and doing a clean build in the chroot to build a = release? That >>> is, is 'Makefile.bsdinstall' just a temporary shortcut for building = test >>> releases or is that the final replacement for 'release/Makefile'? >>=20 >> It was intended (modulo memstick building, docs, and some = miscellaneous=20 >> cleanup) to be the final replacement for release/Makefile. In my=20 >> experience, the automatic fetching, clean build, and chroot was a = major=20 >> impediment to easily making installation media for users to test=20 >> patches. I figured that if people (e.g. re@) really want a totally = clean=20 >> tree, checking one out by hand and building from there didn't seem = like=20 >> an enormous obstacle. >>=20 >> If you think it's a really important feature, I'm happy to add it = back,=20 >> however. >=20 > I think it is a very important feature to ensure release builds are = not > polluted by local changes in /etc/src.conf, etc. I think it would be = good > to support both models perhaps, but for our official release builds I = think > we need the clean environment. I certainly use 'make release' now for = my > own custom FooBSD builds to get a clean environment. >=20 Agreed entirely. I'd consider it a major bug if the insulated release = environment went away, especially since I'm switching release building = at Yahoo to use it. There are plenty of shortcuts available in the = script to reduce the time overhead for quick turnaround testing. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F4365559-D893-44D8-8AD3-C56276BE14C4>