Date: 21 Jan 2003 09:55:08 -0600 From: "Kirk R. Wythers" <kwythers@umn.edu> To: Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se> Cc: Brad Laue <brad@brad-x.com>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: upgrading from STABLE to 5.0 Message-ID: <1043164508.20400.4.camel@x74-47.forestry.umn.edu> In-Reply-To: <20030120220827.GA2533@falcon.midgard.homeip.net> References: <1043080805.29319.14.camel@x74-47.forestry.umn.edu> <3E2C6B7C.6070205@brad-x.com> <20030120220827.GA2533@falcon.midgard.homeip.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 2003-01-20 at 16:08, Erik Trulsson wrote: > On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 04:34:52PM -0500, Brad Laue wrote: > > Kirk R. Wythers wrote: > > > > >1) I see a line in the UPDATING file that says: > > >make buildkernel KERNCONF=YOUR_KERNEL_HERE > > > > A question arises based on this line. > > > > This is instructed to be run after 'make buildworld', but not after make > > installworld. Is there a drawback to building the kernel in this way, > > considering it will be built with GCC 2.95.4 and not 3.2.1? Is > > rebuilding the kernel again after installworld a recommended practice? > > Doing a 'make buildkernel' directly after a 'make buildworld' should > build the kernel using the compiler just built with the buildworld. > So there should be no need to rebuild the kernel again. So... if I look around at my kernel config file 'in my case LORAXKERNEL', I don't see any line about COMPAT_FREEBSD4, only the old COMPAT_43 line. Should I not be building from my old config file? -- Kirk R. Wythers email: kwythers@umn.edu University of Minnesota tel: 612.625.2261 Department of Forest Resources fax: 612.625.5212 Saint Paul, MN 55108 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1043164508.20400.4.camel>