From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Jan 18 1:24: 6 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from Mail6.sc.rr.com (fe6.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.53]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6BFB37B404; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 01:23:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from sc.rr.com ([24.88.102.101]) by Mail6.sc.rr.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.537.53); Thu, 18 Jan 2001 04:23:43 -0500 Received: (from dmaddox@localhost) by sc.rr.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f0I9Obs42009; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 04:24:37 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from dmaddox) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 04:24:37 -0500 From: "Donald J . Maddox" To: Dima Dorfman Cc: John Baldwin , Neil Blakey-Milner , freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG, dan@langille.org, "Donald J . Maddox" Subject: Re: too much confusion over kernel building Message-ID: <20010118042437.A41992@cae88-102-101.sc.rr.com> Reply-To: dmaddox@sc.rr.com Mail-Followup-To: Dima Dorfman , John Baldwin , Neil Blakey-Milner , freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG, dan@langille.org, "Donald J . Maddox" References: <20010118091839.7C8D13E02@bazooka.unixfreak.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20010118091839.7C8D13E02@bazooka.unixfreak.org>; from dima@unixfreak.org on Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 01:18:34AM -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 01:18:34AM -0800, Dima Dorfman wrote: > > Although I agree with this entirely (and personally prefer to stay > away from buildkernel, particularly because MODULES_WITH_WORLD doesn't > always work), I don't think it's a good idea to promote using two > different ways for different purposes to newbies. "Use the old method > if you're not upgrading but use the new method if you're upgrading but > make sure to do a buildworld if you choose the latter path but you > don't need to rebuild the world if you're already running the new, > upgraded, kernel and you're just making modifications to the config > file," (excuse the run-on) sounds a lot more confusing than "use > buildkernel." > > If there's no technical reason buildkernel can't be made to work Most > Of The Time(tm) (which Neil's patches suggest there isn't), I see no > reason just to stick with buildkernel for building a kernel. Of > course, the old way should still be available for use by those who > need/want it. I agree. Frankly, there is no reason I can think of where the use of buildkernel/installkernel would be in any meaningful way superior to the old method *except* in the case of a toolchain upgrade that requires new tools to build the new source. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message