Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 10:08:15 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@rocky.sri.MT.net> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: "Garrett A. Wollman" <wollman@lcs.mit.edu>, "Garrett A. Wollman" <wollman@freefall.freebsd.org>, CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-usrsbin@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/config Makefile main.c Message-ID: <199511291708.KAA20314@rocky.sri.MT.net> In-Reply-To: <8337.817662882@time.cdrom.com> References: <9511291603.AA06038@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu> <8337.817662882@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> You're saying to me that you believe the dependency information to be > updated properly by config, even when adding or deleting lines to the > config file? E.g. it's possible for me to screw around with my config > file, re-run config and get a decent kernel out of what I build? That's impossible to do given the current scheme of 'everything is an option'. However, I think a much better solution to the problem is to have config kick out a 'remember to do a make clean' if the directory exists. If the user chooses not to do that, then it's their problem not ours. I modified the sources to config on my box just so it wouldn't blow the directory away becuase I *HATE* the current behavior, and I never remember to type '-n' because it's not needed on other BSD systems I administer. > And please don't answer with some inane "the experienced user will > know when to blow away /sys/compile/<blah>" response since I already > *know* from bitter experience that this is most emphatically not the > case. Ahh, but the experienced user will know when, it's the inexperienced user that whines about it on the mailing lists. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199511291708.KAA20314>