Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 11:17:48 +0200 From: Brad Knowles <blk@skynet.be> To: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> Cc: Peter van Heusden <pvh@egenetics.com>, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: HEADS UP! Always use the 'make buildkernel' target to make your kernels Message-ID: <v04220805b59338609308@[195.238.1.121]> In-Reply-To: <200007130457.WAA20941@harmony.village.org> References: <v0422080fb590c5bfdca5@[195.238.1.121]> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0007111324170.27918-100000@fling.sanbi.ac.za> <200007130457.WAA20941@harmony.village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 10:57 PM -0600 2000/7/12, Warner Losh wrote: > In message <v0422080fb590c5bfdca5@[195.238.1.121]> Brad Knowles writes: > : Hmm. Good idea. Until then, this needs to be mentioned in the > : documentation. > > How is UPDATING currently not sufficient for this purpose? What I guess the online documentation should say is something like "If you're updating the sources for your machine with cvsup, then you need to follow the kernel build procedure documented in /usr/src/UPDATING, because there may be internal dependancies that have changed with the source update. As of this writing, what /usr/src/UPDATING says to do is: ...", and then to mention that if you're just rebuilding your kernel and haven't updated the sources, to use the "usual" procedure that is documented in section X.Y.Z of the handbook. The problem, as I see it, is that many times the only source of information on what to do is in the archives of this mailing list (or on -CURRENT, where these things were discussed before they got MFC'd), and there is typically a time lag between the changes being made, things being discussed on the list, things being put into /usr/src/UPDATING, and the online documentation (in roughly that order). This can mean hours and even days of downtime for someone unlucky enough to update at the wrong time. The only other alternative I can see is to recommend in the strongest possible terms against people actually trying to *use* -STABLE on production systems, and that only people who are willing to subscribe to the -STABLE mailing list, keep up with perhaps hundreds of messages per day, understand each and every one of them, and be able to usefully contribute to the discussion, should even bother attempting to use -STABLE. However, at that point, I see little difference between -STABLE and -CURRENT. -- These are my opinions -- not to be taken as official Skynet policy ====================================================================== Brad Knowles, <blk@skynet.be> || Belgacom Skynet SA/NV Systems Architect, Mail/News/FTP/Proxy Admin || Rue Colonel Bourg, 124 Phone/Fax: +32-2-706.13.11/12.49 || B-1140 Brussels http://www.skynet.be || Belgium To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?v04220805b59338609308>