On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:59:44AM +0100, Uwe Doering wrote:
> Loren M. Lang wrote:


> >3.  The handbook seems to suggest to use the config, make, make install
> >procedure for installing the kernel if you have no other reason for not
> >using it, what is the reason for this?  (The paragraph immediately
> >following procedure 2)
> This sequence takes care that all the modules get installed together 
> with the matching kernel, that a backup of both the kernel and the 
> modules is available (suffix '.old') in case the new kernel doesn't work 
> properly, and it also deals with the system immutable flag ('schg') that 
> protects '/kernel' from being deleted or clobbered by accident.  You 
> would have to do all these things by hand if you didn't use the 
> recommended sequence.

I mean why use that procedure over a make buildkernel installkernel, I
thought they both did all that.

>    Uwe
> -- 
> Uwe Doering         |  EscapeBox - Managed On-Demand UNIX Servers
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]  |  http://www.escapebox.net
> _______________________________________________
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> !DSPAM:40504843233956013019169!

I sense much NT in you.
NT leads to Bluescreen.
Bluescreen leads to downtime.
Downtime leads to suffering.
NT is the path to the darkside.
Powerful Unix is.

Public Key: ftp://ftp.tallye.com/pub/lorenl_pubkey.asc
Fingerprint: B3B9 D669 69C9 09EC 1BCD  835A FAF3 7A46 E4A3 280C

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to