Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 23:15:51 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> To: "Terry L. Tyson Jr." <ty@tyson.homeunix.org> Cc: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Subject: [PATCH] Re: handbook - kernel build question Message-ID: <20040423201551.GB51713@gothmog.gr> In-Reply-To: <20040423131549.GA40621@tyson.homeunix.org> References: <20040423131549.GA40621@tyson.homeunix.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Message copied from freebsd-questions to freebsd-doc --]
[-- where it fits the list charter a lot more. --]
On 2004-04-23 08:15, "Terry L. Tyson Jr." <ty@tyson.homeunix.org> wrote:
> In section 9.3 of the handbook just before the two procedures it lists
> "If you are building a new kernel without updating the source code
> (perhaps just to add a new option, such as IPFIREWALL) you can use
> either procedure."
>
> However, after the two procedures it says "If you have not upgraded
> your source tree in any way (you have not run CVsup, CTM, or used
> anoncvs), then you should use the config, make depend, make, make
> install sequence." which is procedure 1.
>
> This seems contradictory to me. Also, I have not upgraded anything on
> this particular box, used procedure 2 and all seems well.
Hi Terry,
IMHO, the wording could have been less confusing and certainly not
contradictory at all, if the second snippet mentioned had used "could"
instead of "should".
Would it all look better written as shown below?
%%%
Index: chapter.sgml
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/ncvs/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/kernelconfig/chapter.sgml,v
retrieving revision 1.130
diff -u -r1.130 chapter.sgml
--- chapter.sgml 25 Mar 2004 09:55:18 -0000 1.130
+++ chapter.sgml 23 Apr 2004 20:06:01 -0000
@@ -358,9 +358,11 @@
</indexterm>
<para>If you have <emphasis>not</emphasis> upgraded your source
- tree in any way (you have not run <application>CVSup</application>,
+ tree in any way since the last time you successfully completed
+ a <maketarget>buildworld</maketarget>-<maketarget>installworld</maketarget> cycle
+ (you have not run <application>CVSup</application>,
<application>CTM</application>, or used
- <application>anoncvs</application>), then you should use the
+ <application>anoncvs</application>), then it is safe to use the
<command>config</command>, <maketarget>make depend</maketarget>,
<command>make</command>, <maketarget>make install</maketarget> sequence.
</para>
%%%
This would render as:
If you have *not* upgraded your source tree in any way since the
last time you successfully completed an `installworld' (you have
not run CVSup, CTM, or used anoncvs), then it is safe to use the
config, make depend, make, make install sequence.
Is the (AFAICT intended) meaning clearer this way?
- Giorgos
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040423201551.GB51713>