Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:58:31 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Eitan Adler <eadler@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-doc-head@freebsd.org, svn-doc-all@freebsd.org, doc-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r40117 - in head/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/developers-handbook: kernelbuild policies tools Message-ID: <EFFD735E-6B26-4B56-8FD9-D7158EEC31CC@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <CAF6rxgmjGS3ahcrVsgzPqo%2B-ep9PyOmPn6oZBEH0AWJYDChzCw@mail.gmail.com> References: <201211211357.qALDvDsP064264@svn.freebsd.org> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1211211255140.2164@multics.mit.edu> <CAF6rxgmjGS3ahcrVsgzPqo%2B-ep9PyOmPn6oZBEH0AWJYDChzCw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Nov 21, 2012, at 6:14 PM, Eitan Adler wrote: > On 21 November 2012 13:14, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> wrote: >> This seems to remove the last documentation of manually invoking = config(8) >> to build a kernel, which seems worthy of explicit mention, and = perhaps >> broader discussion. >=20 > This should probably be documented in config(1) or some other "how the > build process works" document. So far as I could tell, the old method > should be considered an implementation detail, not an alternative. > That said I agree this probably deserves some broader consideration, > so perhaps doc@ is the best place to discuss? Or would a developer > focussed ML like hackers@ be better? I don't see why it can't just stay in the handbook... It is widely = used, and often developers use it quite heavily. It is more than just = an implementation "detail", since it would be extremely hard to swap = anything else in right now. Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?EFFD735E-6B26-4B56-8FD9-D7158EEC31CC>