Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 15:34:33 -0800 From: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> To: Greg Black <gjb@gbch.net> Cc: dan@langille.org, Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Patch to fix "make buildkernel requires full obj directory" mistake Message-ID: <20010119233438.C79B73E02@bazooka.unixfreak.org> In-Reply-To: Message from Greg Black <gjb@gbch.net> of "Fri, 19 Jan 2001 17:55:58 %2B1000." <nospam-3a67f30ee503331@maxim.gbch.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Like lots of people who use FreeBSD rather than tinker with it, > I have never done "make any-kind-of-world" and never expect to. > I create a kernel config with my stuff in it, and do config, > make, make install. I trust this is not going to be broken? This is not broken, and will not be broken. Lots of people will scream if it is, myself included (this was discussed when buildkernel was first introduced, and the consensus was that the "old way" should/will always work). This thread is about not teaching two ways (buildkernel and make && make install) to new users who, as you described yourself, have never done make any-kind-of-world, and only want to build a kernel for whatever reason (hardware not in GENERIC, memory footprint, etc.). In other, shorter, words: both ways will work, we just don't want to confuse new users with two ways to achieve the same task. 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?20010119233438.C79B73E02>