From owner-freebsd-current Wed Feb 22 16:09:35 1995 Return-Path: current-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) id QAA10886 for current-outgoing; Wed, 22 Feb 1995 16:09:35 -0800 Received: from ref.tfs.com (ref.tfs.com [140.145.254.251]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with ESMTP id QAA10880 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 1995 16:09:33 -0800 Received: (from phk@localhost) by ref.tfs.com (8.6.8/8.6.6) id QAA06222; Wed, 22 Feb 1995 16:08:46 -0800 From: Poul-Henning Kamp Message-Id: <199502230008.QAA06222@ref.tfs.com> Subject: Re: TRUE and FALSE To: nate@trout.sri.MT.net (Nate Williams) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 1995 16:08:46 -0800 (PST) Cc: current@freefall.cdrom.com In-Reply-To: <199502230008.RAA16127@trout.sri.MT.net> from "Nate Williams" at Feb 22, 95 05:08:06 pm Content-Type: text Content-Length: 924 Sender: current-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > > At what gain are we doing this? I believe it's a noble gain to have the > > > source tree compile w/out reference to /usr/include, but what does it > > > gain us? The only thing I can see where it's a big deal is building a > > > brand-new $(DESTDIR) tree. Other than that, most of the time I *want* > > > to use the files in /usr/include and NOT those in /usr/src (speaking as > > > a user-land kind of guy). > > > > "The only thing..." > > > > You are elected to release eng for 2.2 if you want to ... :-) > > chroot is your friend. ;) Yes, sure, but it's only a workaround. The fundamental problem is that the source-tree should be self-contained. Just think about the benefit of a "make world" which will not hose your c-compiler if the c-compiler source is sick... -- Poul-Henning Kamp TRW Financial Systems, Inc. I am Pentium Of Borg. Division is Futile. You WILL be approximated.