Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2001 12:23:35 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Valentin Nechayev <netch@iv.nn.kiev.ua> Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.ORG>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Two Junior Kernel Hacker tasks.. Message-ID: <3B34ECB7.CF7F4047@mindspring.com> References: <XFMail.010622105201.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20010623081844.B982@iv.nn.kiev.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> make buildkernel is rather easy way to work it around: in > any case object tree is machine-dependent, and one yet > another directory does not destroy anything. ;| The "make buildkernel" approach sucks for incremental builds, since you are unable to avoid the "config" run each time, and a lot of unnecessary stuff gets compiled again because of opt_*.h files whose contents have not changed (even if you defeat the clean of the compile directory). The "make release" process has similar problems, for that matter. Too bad no one seems willing to commit incremental fixes towards cleaning that up, or, when they are willing (as in this case), people argue that it's unnecessary, and nothing ever gets done. I think they should "go for it" with the architecture specific config directories (though I would point out that they can achieve this effect already, with the correct "config" arguments -- I do agree it should be the default). -- Terry 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?3B34ECB7.CF7F4047>