Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 15:26:59 -0700 From: David Wolfskill <david@catwhisker.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, "freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org" <freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase Message-ID: <20160509222659.GB20662@albert.catwhisker.org> In-Reply-To: <6691787.Xk1Kup9mab@ralph.baldwin.cx> References: <CAOc73CC6WoFHPDBa6LGMyhmnA1ZjiemffyTJBGBNSZwPOu8KzA@mail.gmail.com> <3382220.3AgOZzUBmF@ralph.baldwin.cx> <20160509184544.GU1063@albert.catwhisker.org> <6691787.Xk1Kup9mab@ralph.baldwin.cx>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--l76fUT7nc3MelDdI Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 12:43:42PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > ... > > I suppose there's probably some way to arrange things so the KERNCONF > > specification in /etc/src.conf has one value during "buildkernel" and a > > different value during "inistallkernel" -- but ... seriously...??!? >=20 > One could do some ugly things with .make() to change the default based on > the target being invoked (kind of like folks storing port options in > /etc/make.conf conditional on the current directory), but that would be > hackish. Right; "hackish" is probably a bit ... kinder than what came to mind. :-} > > Wouldn't it be cleaner to have different variables (e.g., that could > > each default to the KERNCONF specification, but could be overridden in > > a simple text file that doesn't require delving into make(1) arcana to > > craft or understand)? >=20 > I think having separate variables is fine, and I think your suggestion of > KERNCONF_BUILD and KERNCONF_INSTALL that default to KERNCONF would be > fine. From the thread, I think it would mean you would need to use the > two settings in your /etc/src.conf but that other folks wanting to install > both would just stick with KERNCONF, correct? That is my understanding, yes. I don't mind tweaking things a bit for an uncommon case; I'd rather avoid twisting my mind into a pretzel to do something that's been quite easy historically. :-) > ... > > Would that work? It seems as if that would work for my case. >=20 > Yes. I think that is also simpler than having a new WITH/WITHOUT variable > to control how installkernel treats KERNCONF. > .... Yay...! :-) Peace, david --=20 David H. Wolfskill david@catwhisker.org Those who would murder in the name of God or prophet are blasphemous coward= s. See http://www.catwhisker.org/~david/publickey.gpg for my public key. --l76fUT7nc3MelDdI Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQF8BAEBCgBmBQJXMQ6yXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRDQ0I3Q0VGOTE3QTgwMUY0MzA2NEQ3N0Ix NTM5Q0M0MEEwNDlFRTE3AAoJEBU5zECgSe4X/aMH/RA4QnvgmPhIqD7ZiUuQ6Tu3 9VXh9y7by0kfidojlNoA/CD1MGnOWigeHMhjgT1TVOgx/Z/J+DyrYRnbJetEf0/+ /ed7dinzdNeWlksW9gTc1ltzAfxf/rqMSXBTSp0/Fk3vrAn9X9sewL45/mbPKjP5 SRlirayuW3wtQx8MNmeaqZUh+JW9qTt1hlYuCHq2kraksyYieGLhApyeIeacTgq+ v98etvJStvRZ0xf59KhxlQ79KaQAue8Qmw0HoT7aJEZK43Klp4AXcfsZMzZhpFg3 jYI34N/ZFrtZJ95ynKir8GNRMipS3dXr14zaTrZ7cCqvCGkF3CdpTR9FjPO0egI= =0lIX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --l76fUT7nc3MelDdI--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160509222659.GB20662>