From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jan 18 19:14:25 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A17BC37B402; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 19:14:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from harmony.village.org (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0J3Dvs50534; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 20:13:58 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Message-Id: <200101190313.f0J3Dvs50534@harmony.village.org> To: Josef Karthauser Subject: Re: Patch to fix "make buildkernel requires full obj directory" mistake Cc: Neil Blakey-Milner , FreeBSD Current Users , Marcel Moolenaar In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 19 Jan 2001 01:23:41 GMT." <20010119012341.B98401@tao.org.uk> References: <20010119012341.B98401@tao.org.uk> <20010118141258.C84497@tao.org.uk> <20010118101315.A10537@rapier.smartspace.co.za> <20010118141258.C84497@tao.org.uk> <200101190036.f0J0aUs49436@harmony.village.org> Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 20:13:57 -0700 From: Warner Losh Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <20010119012341.B98401@tao.org.uk> Josef Karthauser writes: : On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 05:36:30PM -0700, Warner Losh wrote: : > In message <20010118141258.C84497@tao.org.uk> Josef Karthauser writes: : > : Hear hear. We had to back out the 'make buildkernel' within PicoBSD : > : because there was no guarentee that the user had ever done a make : > : buildworld. Additionally if you do an : > : env MAKEOBJDIRPREFIX=/usr/myobj make buildkernel : > : you have the same problem even if someone did do a make buildworld. : > : > Wait a minute. I thought that crunchgen required a buildworld... : : In no way at all.... what do you mean? I thought that crunchgen dealt with the .o's that were created in the buildworld process. It looks like it rebuilds them itself in a whacked out way to make the whole thing work. Still, I don't think it is too onerous a requirement that a buildworld have happened first. The other reason to encourage it strongly is that there are too many binary incompatibilities with the kernel interface for some programs, even in -stable, so we'd want to encourage people to build and install both at the same time. I'd imagine that the same sort of argument would apply for picobsd since you don't want that to be cross threaded. :-). But maybe I'm being overly paranoid here. Maybe I've answered one too many questions that boil down to "just rebuild the world and stop arguing with me, things will start to work". Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message