Re: Why isn't NOCLEAN the default? (was: Re: Cross-Development with NetBSD)

2002-11-22 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 02:48:01PM -0800, David Schultz wrote: > Thus spake Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > I have long wondered why NOCLEAN isn't the default. There seem to > > > be a few cases where it doesn't DTRT for kernel builds, but it > > > seems a bit conservative to make increme

Re: Why isn't NOCLEAN the default? (was: Re: Cross-Development with NetBSD)

2002-11-21 Thread David Schultz
Thus spake Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > I have long wondered why NOCLEAN isn't the default. There seem to > > be a few cases where it doesn't DTRT for kernel builds, but it > > seems a bit conservative to make incremental world builds require > > that an undocumented variable be defined.

Re: Why isn't NOCLEAN the default? (was: Re: Cross-Development with NetBSD)

2002-11-21 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 02:02:20PM -0800, David Schultz wrote: > Thus spake John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Make release is a very poor example b/c make release goes to great > > efforts to create a clean-room environment for a release. make > > rerelease is quite helpful though and does do

Why isn't NOCLEAN the default? (was: Re: Cross-Development with NetBSD)

2002-11-21 Thread David Schultz
Thus spake John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Make release is a very poor example b/c make release goes to great > efforts to create a clean-room environment for a release. make > rerelease is quite helpful though and does do what you want to > restart a previous release. :) Also, make buildworl