Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 28 Apr 1996 11:37:14 +0800
From:      Peter Wemm <peter@spinner.DIALix.COM>
To:        Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Cc:        CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-all@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-sys@freefall.freebsd.org, joerg@freefall.freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/conf Makefile.i386 
Message-ID:  <199604280337.LAA10519@spinner.DIALix.COM>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 28 Apr 1996 02:17:09 %2B1000." <199604271617.CAA00220@godzilla.zeta.org.au> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>  Modified:    sys/i386/conf  Makefile.i386
>>  Log:
>>  Make `install' depend on `kernel'.  Some idiot tried to install a
>>  non-built kernel and complained in Usenet... :-)
>
>This was consistent with thousands of other Makefiles in the system.
>It is a feature for `make install' to not build anything.
>
>Bruce

And a highly desirable feature, some of us build with one uid and install
with root later on and do not want to have root running stuff changing 
ownerships of files on us.

Also,  I NFS mount my build trees and do 'make reinstall' to install a 
coherent build on three machines, and really enjoy not having all the 'make 
installs' try and build stuff if I cross over a CTM delta boundry or 
something.  (Yes, I know this does not affect the commit in question).

However, the only place that this rule is "broken" that I'm aware of is the 
bsd.sgml.mk file which tries to reformat the html/ascii/etc files at install
time.

As for this commit, I'd suggest that it'd be better to test for the existance 
of the kernel before installing it, rather than using a 'make' dependency.

ie, something like this:
install:
	@if [ ! -f kernel ]; then echo "Build the kernel first!"; exit 1; fi
	.. rest of install..

Cheers,
-Peter





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199604280337.LAA10519>