Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 19:33:26 -0800 From: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> To: Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org> Cc: Josef Karthauser <joe@tao.org.uk>, Neil Blakey-Milner <nbm@mithrandr.moria.org>, FreeBSD Current Users <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>, Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Patch to fix "make buildkernel requires full obj directory" mistake Message-ID: <20010119033331.BA6C93E02@bazooka.unixfreak.org> In-Reply-To: Message from Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org> of "Thu, 18 Jan 2001 20:13:57 MST." <200101190313.f0J3Dvs50534@harmony.village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 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". While this is all true, I believe the intention of the patch was to make it possible to do a buildkernel even if you aren't upgrading (i.e., you're running the same version of the kernel that you're trying to build). In some cases, such as fresh installs, people don't want to have to do a buildworld to configure and install a custom kernel. Of course, there's always the "old way" (config && make depend, etc.) of doing this, but it seems that most people agree that recommending two different ways of doing one task depending on the environment adds unnecessary confusion for newcomers (e.g., "use buildkernel if you're doing an upgrade, but config if you're not, but if you upgrade later you still need buildkernel", etc. is more confusing than, "use buildkernel"). This thread and patch originated as a response to a thread on -doc (I think) where this was discussed. See the current archives if you're interested, you can't miss it. Personally, I think that if there's no technical reason why buildkernel can't work without a prior buildworld assuming that the kernel you're building is of the same version that's currently running, trying to explain two different methods to new users should be avoided. Thanks Dima Dorfman dima@unixfreak.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010119033331.BA6C93E02>