From owner-freebsd-questions  Thu Jan 18  1:54:10 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mail5.sc.rr.com (fe5.southeast.rr.com [24.93.67.52])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 5DCED37B6A0; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 01:53:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sc.rr.com ([24.88.102.101]) by mail5.sc.rr.com  with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.537.53);
	 Thu, 18 Jan 2001 04:53:45 -0500
Received: (from dmaddox@localhost)
	by sc.rr.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f0I9seM42184;
	Thu, 18 Jan 2001 04:54:40 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from dmaddox)
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 04:54:40 -0500
From: "Donald J . Maddox" <dmaddox@sc.rr.com>
To: Dan Langille <dan@langille.org>
Cc: "Donald J . Maddox" <dmaddox@sc.rr.com>,
	freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: too much confusion over kernel building
Message-ID: <20010118045440.A42092@cae88-102-101.sc.rr.com>
Reply-To: dmaddox@sc.rr.com
Mail-Followup-To: Dan Langille <dan@langille.org>,
	"Donald J . Maddox" <dmaddox@sc.rr.com>,
	freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG
References: <20010118091839.7C8D13E02@bazooka.unixfreak.org>; <20010118042437.A41992@cae88-102-101.sc.rr.com> <200101180927.WAA14914@ducky.nz.freebsd.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <200101180927.WAA14914@ducky.nz.freebsd.org>; from dan@langille.org on Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 10:27:04PM +1300
Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 10:27:04PM +1300, Dan Langille wrote:
> On 18 Jan 2001, at 4:24, Donald J . Maddox wrote:
> 
> > 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.
> 
> There is the added advantage that the "new" method involves fewer 
> steps. And That Is A Good Thing (tm), especially for people new to 
> FreeBSD.  If they get get a kernel to compile and work the first time, 
> without problems, it gives them a *big* boost.  The few steps, the hard 
> to mess up.

For people new to FreeBSD, it's really not as simple as:

# make buildkernel KERNEL=MYKERNEL
# make installkernel KERNEL=MYKERNEL

At this point, the newbie has already had to:

# cd /usr/src/sys/<arch>/conf
# cp GENERIC MYKERNEL
# vi MYKERNEL
...  Agonizes over incomprehensible options/devices ...

All of this is required regardless of whether you use 'the old
method' or 'the new method'.

At this point, the newbie can:

a)  # config MYKERNEL
    # cd ../../compile/MYKERNEL
    # make depend
    # make
    # make install

b)  # cd /usr/src
    # make buildkernel KERNEL=MYKERNEL
    # make installkernel KERNEL=MYKERNEL

Sure, b) has 2 less steps, but frankly, I think the difference is
lost in the noise.  Actually creating a working custom config seems
to be the showstopper for most folks.  In any case, talking about 2
different ways of doing this is *sure* to confuse lots of people :)


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message