From owner-freebsd-current Mon Nov 27 15: 9:51 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from hera.drwilco.net (10dyn85.dh.casema.net [212.64.31.85]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F12D37B479 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 15:09:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from ceres.drwilco.nl (ceres.drwilco.net [10.1.1.19]) by hera.drwilco.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eARNQ8N14583 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 00:26:12 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from drwilco@drwilco.nl) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.0.20001128000255.00d43580@mail.drwilco.net> X-Sender: drwilco@mail.drwilco.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 00:09:12 +0100 To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: "Rogier R. Mulhuijzen" Subject: make release & CVS? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I want to start building releases on a home box since it's not doing much else when I'm at work. But I have a rather low bandwidth, so I was wondering about the CVS checkout of /usr/src that the make release does. With my bandwidth the source may very well be out of synch with what the binaries were built with (and it takes way too long). Or am I missing something. Also is there anything against doing a 'make clean' in /usr/src (or whereever it's based) and then slurping that tree into the release tree? (in a private patch of course, not suggesting this to be put into -CURRENT itself or anything. I know it might not be the preffered way of doing a real release, but for test builds, would it be acceptable to patch the Makefile to do just that? DocWilco To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message