From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 22 19:01:40 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: doc@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E629316A401; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 19:01:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kensmith@cse.Buffalo.EDU) Received: from opus.cse.buffalo.edu (opus.cse.Buffalo.EDU [128.205.32.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89A3413C4C5; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 19:01:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kensmith@cse.Buffalo.EDU) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.cse.buffalo.edu [127.0.0.1]) by opus.cse.buffalo.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id l0MJ1cAp012970; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 14:01:38 -0500 (EST) From: Ken Smith To: Doug Barton In-Reply-To: <45B506A7.7060909@FreeBSD.org> References: <200701171832.28368.dienst@marcrenearns.de> <474078f80701181348q16ceb16bs40ba45b3d7057b83@mail.gmail.com> <20070121212428.GA47379@rambler-co.ru> <200701221111.56264.jhb@freebsd.org> <1169489832.11889.64.camel@opus.cse.buffalo.edu> <45B506A7.7060909@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-255Sk9GV6LSacJklRQsc" Organization: U. Buffalo CSE Department Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 14:01:38 -0500 Message-Id: <1169492498.11889.74.camel@opus.cse.buffalo.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.1.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Cc: doc@FreeBSD.org, John Baldwin , freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org, Murray Stokely , Ruslan Ermilov , re@FreeBSD.org, Marc Ren? Arns Subject: Re: make buildkernel fails without complete source tree X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 19:01:41 -0000 --=-255Sk9GV6LSacJklRQsc Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 10:47 -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > Ken Smith wrote: >=20 > > 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. >=20 > True, but that's not even close to being the majority of FreeBSD > users. Given that we promote 'make buildkernel' as the "proper" way of > making a kernel, IMO we need to do what is necessary to make it easy > for users to do that. >=20 True. I guess this is sort of where I was headed. IMHO we should either leave it as-is for the traditionalists or we should bite the bullet and stop providing a separate kernel source tree. As John pointed out in the message after this one life has moved on and now /usr/src is teeny compared to the size of disks. Is it worth the hassle/confusion to provide just kernel source any more? --=20 Ken Smith - From there to here, from here to | kensmith@cse.buffalo.edu there, funny things are everywhere. | - Theodore Geisel | --=-255Sk9GV6LSacJklRQsc 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) iD8DBQBFtQoS/G14VSmup/YRApuUAKCJRJBtv/jm47ghvEvD/Ffwr0aHfwCfcghk F4I5VtHnEDTYDrcBuJzpCFE= =tGnK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-255Sk9GV6LSacJklRQsc--