From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 9 10:19:57 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C3E516A4CF for ; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 10:19:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from dragon.nuxi.com (trang.nuxi.com [66.93.134.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1252C43D32 for ; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 10:19:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien@dragon.nuxi.com) Received: from dragon.nuxi.com (obrien@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dragon.nuxi.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id hB9IJVRm029323; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 10:19:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien@dragon.nuxi.com) Received: (from obrien@localhost) by dragon.nuxi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id hB9IJKp7029318; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 10:19:20 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien) Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 10:19:20 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" To: Kris Kennaway Message-ID: <20031209181920.GD19222@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <20031206171511.GA23158@SDF.LONESTAR.ORG> <20031207131034.X7085@carver.gumbysoft.com> <20031207230044.GA6169@SDF.LONESTAR.ORG> <20031208180718.GA49355@xor.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031208180718.GA49355@xor.obsecurity.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.2-BETA Organization: The NUXI BSD Group X-Pgp-Rsa-Fingerprint: B7 4D 3E E9 11 39 5F A3 90 76 5D 69 58 D9 98 7A X-Pgp-Rsa-Keyid: 1024/34F9F9D5 cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: last cvs Makefile.inc1 errors X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: obrien@freebsd.org List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 18:19:57 -0000 On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 10:07:18AM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 11:00:44PM +0000, Nuno Teixeira wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > It solves it! I'm using 5.1 p11. I think that this should be documented > > on UPDATING file. What do you think? > > The documented upgrade procedure does a 'buildworld' before > 'buildkernel' for precisely this kind of problem. I've been meaning to ask this for a while... why does everyone recomend: make buildworld make buildkernel make installkernel make installworld vs. make buildworld make kernel make installworld