Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:59:37 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@MIT.EDU> 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: <CE9A6172-0450-4F60-9234-F8B159260A7C@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.GSO.1.10.1211212031500.2164@multics.mit.edu> References: <201211211357.qALDvDsP064264@svn.freebsd.org> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1211211255140.2164@multics.mit.edu> <CAF6rxgmjGS3ahcrVsgzPqo%2B-ep9PyOmPn6oZBEH0AWJYDChzCw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1211212031500.2164@multics.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Nov 21, 2012, at 6:33 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > On Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 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. >> >> This should probably be documented in config(1) or some other "how the > (config(8)) >> build process works" document. So far as I could tell, the old method >> should be considered an implementation detail, not an alternative. > > The old method does not require building a toolchain or buildenv, if I remember correctly. No, it does not. Nor does it require anything more than is on the system right now. Often, this is sufficient. Sometimes it isn't. The buildkernel version was done to keep people from shooting themselves... Warner >> 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 think hackers would be better. > > -Ben
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CE9A6172-0450-4F60-9234-F8B159260A7C>