Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:08:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: phk@phk.freebsd.dk, rwatson@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Summary: experiences with NanoBSD, successes and nits on a Soekris 4801 Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.43.0506201507010.11816-100000@sea.ntplx.net> In-Reply-To: <20050620.125452.102654445.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <Pine.GSO.4.43.0506191610170.7472-100000@sea.ntplx.net> > Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org> writes: > : How about NO_FOO[_INSTALL], where NO_FOO = no build and no install, > : and NO_FOO_INSTALL just prevents the install. In theory, you could > : build the complete system, then use NO_FOO_INSTALL instead of rm(1). > > What's wrong with making sure that NO_FOO will work in the install > case to not install foo when it is set, even if it was unset in the > build process? If it works or can be made to work, then nothing. -- DE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.43.0506201507010.11816-100000>