Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 13:17:12 -0500 From: Ken Smith <kensmith@cse.Buffalo.EDU> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: re@freebsd.org, freebsd-doc@freebsd.org, Murray Stokely <murray.stokely@gmail.com>, Ruslan Ermilov <ru@freebsd.org>, doc@freebsd.org, Marc Ren? Arns <dienst@marcrenearns.de> Subject: Re: make buildkernel fails without complete source tree Message-ID: <1169489832.11889.64.camel@opus.cse.buffalo.edu> In-Reply-To: <200701221111.56264.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <200701171832.28368.dienst@marcrenearns.de> <474078f80701181348q16ceb16bs40ba45b3d7057b83@mail.gmail.com> <20070121212428.GA47379@rambler-co.ru> <200701221111.56264.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=-yOaw9K8bikyabgk0aQv4
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 11:11 -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Sunday 21 January 2007 16:24, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 01:48:14PM -0800, Murray Stokely wrote:
> > > On 1/18/07, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote:
> > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> > > >- { " sys", "/usr/src/sys (FreeBSD kernel)",
> > > >+ { " sys", "/usr/src/sys (FreeBSD kernel; requi=
res=20
> > > >'base'
> > > >to build)",
> > >=20
> > > I think this is a good solution.
> > >=20
> > I don't think this is a good idea as it's not actually required.
> > The sys/ part have traditionally been standalone. And if you're
> > not upgrading then "buildkernel" is just a convenience alias for
> > config/make method. Actually this method is always used except
> > that in the buildkernel case it will use an upgraded toolchain
> > if it was previously built by "buildworld".
>=20
> It is required for buildkernel as otherwise there's no Makefile in /usr/s=
rc=20
> with a buildkernel target. It's only not required if you do 'config, etc=
.'=20
> by hand, but 'make buildkernel' requires some sort of /usr/src/Makefile,=20
> obviously. :)
I think that's what Ruslan meant by it having "traditionally been
standalone". By tradition someone who just extracted the sys stuff
wasn't expecting to do 'make buildkernel', they expected to do the
'config, etc'. For example someone who wanted to build custom kernels
but had no intention of updating the machine using the source tree, and
they knew how to build the kernels manually.
The truth is the message should read "(FreeBSD kernel; requires 'base'
to build if you insist on using 'make buildkernel' in /usr/src to build
a kernel but if you know how to build a kernel 'manually' then 'base' is
not required)". But I don't think that fits in 80 columns... :-)
The message as proposed above also begs the question "So why have sys as
a separate thing if all you can do is look at it?. That's not true but
it is what the message suggests.
--=20
Ken Smith
- From there to here, from here to | kensmith@cse.buffalo.edu
there, funny things are everywhere. |
- Theodore Geisel |
--=-yOaw9K8bikyabgk0aQv4
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQBFtP+o/G14VSmup/YRAsleAJ4k4faT+L7d6qK0TbIOL9dVlhueSwCfY20g
RuoggeRsBxaPPAJo6ui455U=
=YTZD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-yOaw9K8bikyabgk0aQv4--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1169489832.11889.64.camel>