----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Wyman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Francisco Reyes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Vivek Khera" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Kris Kennaway"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 3:36 AM
Subject: Re: why new buildkernel (was HEADS UP! Always use the 'make
buildkernel'..."


> > Why is this new procedure necessary.
> > I recall reading is because of some new additions, but what were
> > these additions (I have seen the name, but have no clue what
> > they are.. binutils?) and why the new, more cumbersome,
> > procedure?
> > francisco
> > Moderator of the Corporate BSD list
> > http://www.egroups.com/group/BSD_Corporate
>
> If you missed one of Kris Kennaway's previous messages about this, this is
> how he described it:
>
> --SNIP--
> Buildkernel internally handles tool dependency problems, where the kernel
> build depends on tools which were built by make installworld, but not yet
> installed on the system. The alternative is to post a detailed list of
> which bits must be installed before you can build your new kernel, each
> time it happens, which is error-prone and subject to people not reading
> their mail (oops, which is exactly what happened this time around).
> --SNIP--
>
Can someone (who is knowledgable enough to explain it properly, otherwise I
would make a go at it) put this in handbook/makeworld.html? I just read it
and it still says to do your kernel upgrade after doing make world (or make
installworld). There is a -CURRENT section in there detailing -j4, so why
not a 4.0-STABLE (and higher) section detailing this change to the kernel
building procedure and why it is now preferred over make world/installworld
and then kernel config/make depend/make/make install kernel building
procedure?



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message

Reply via email to