Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 18:59:30 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: Barney Wolff <barney@databus.com> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: last cvs Makefile.inc1 errors Message-ID: <20031210025930.GA34162@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20031209191252.GA39883@pit.databus.com> References: <20031206171511.GA23158@SDF.LONESTAR.ORG> <20031207131034.X7085@carver.gumbysoft.com> <20031207230044.GA6169@SDF.LONESTAR.ORG> <20031208180718.GA49355@xor.obsecurity.org> <20031209181920.GD19222@dragon.nuxi.com> <20031209191252.GA39883@pit.databus.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 02:12:52PM -0500, Barney Wolff wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 10:19:20AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
> > 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
>
> I can think of two reasons: First, the separate steps make it possible
> to do make reinstallkernel when one does not want to overwrite kernel.old.
Your sequence is:
make buildworld
make buildkernel
make reinstallkernel
make installworld
which is not what we suggest in UPDATING and not what I have above.
Please stick to the exact sequence above.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031210025930.GA34162>