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
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
