From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Jul 10 14:22:14 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E54937B985; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 14:22:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (kris@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id OAA07484; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 14:22:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: kris owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 14:22:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Kris Kennaway To: Vivek Khera Cc: Jeff Wyman , stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: HEADS UP! Always use the 'make buildkernel' target to make yer kernels In-Reply-To: <14697.56500.375223.683195@onceler.kcilink.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Vivek Khera wrote: > >> So you're saying that even after upgrading from 3.4 to 4.0 you should > >> use make buildkernel? That seems counter to what has been discussed > >> before, and is way non-BSD-ish. > > JW> The buildkernel process is used _during_ an upgrade. After the > JW> new 4.0 kernel has been booted and appropriate changes have been made to > JW> the system, kernels may be built successfully in the traditional way. > > Which is contrary to the "subject line says it all" opening sentence > of the original message... thus the confusion. Thanks for the > clarification. My Wyman doesn't speak from a position of any authority here, I'm afraid. Yes, the old method will work most of the time, but don't even think about complaining when it doesn't. Kris -- In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message