Re: Any chance of release patch being committed?
On Fri, 04 May 2001 00:00:58 +0200, J Wunsch wrote: We are, but why would we use anything else than GENERIC for it, seriously? I'd never roll a `release' for my current machine. When you get commitment to a fixed hardware configuration for two years and you want to leave your datacenter full of hosts ready to power up and play off a custom CDROM, a release that uses a custom kernel is desirable. That said, I don't think that the release should pick up KERNCONF. I think a middle-ground option is to have the release pick up RELEASE_KERNCONF. Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Any chance of release patch being committed?
J Wunsch wrote: Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Isn't anyone but me and Walnut Creek cum BSDI cum Windriver Systems using make release?!? We are, but why would we use anything else than GENERIC for it, seriously? I'd never roll a `release' for my current machine. Examples abound: 1) Licensed commercial drivers not present in GENERIC 2) Cut down kernel for low memory systems 3) Kernel without support for 686/586/386 in an embedded system 4) Kernel without most of the disk controllers, e.g. a Compaq-specific Jump Start disk for FreeBSD Etc. It shouldn't matter anyway; it doesn't change the normal default sysinstall behaviour, image, or image size at all (the image is identical), unless KERNCONF is overridden. If that's so unreasonable, I suggest you remove the ? before the = in /usr/src/release/Makefile in the KERNCONF assignment, which looks like: KERNCONF?=GENERIC Since it makes damn little sense to allow it to be overridden, if the resulting CDROM will fail to install /kernel, and the resulting system will not be able to boot without an explict load kernel.MYKERNEL command to the boot loader. Doing that would reduce functionality; making my change would increase it... but make one or the other of them, please: in it's current state, the code _pretends_ that an override will work, when it will not. I hate code that lies to me, even if by omission; don't you? -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Any chance of release patch being committed?
tlambert2 Examples abound: All of examples are just we want yet another *generic* kernel for specific machines. Why you don't replace src/sys/${arch}/conf/GENERIC file to your own (customized) version? It is too simple, and matches your requirements. -- - Makoto `MAR' MATSUSHITA To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Any chance of release patch being committed?
On Fri, 04 May 2001 20:38:06 +0900, Makoto MATSUSHITA wrote: All of examples are just we want yet another *generic* kernel for specific machines. Why you don't replace src/sys/${arch}/conf/GENERIC file to your own (customized) version? It is too simple, and matches your requirements. Because that's a repo-backed file. Why make me manage CVS conflicts on update? Why not just allow something like RELEASE_KERNCONF? What's the real objection to it? So far, all I've heard is Gee, I've never needed that. :-) Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Any chance of release patch being committed?
On 04-May-01 Sheldon Hearn wrote: On Fri, 04 May 2001 00:00:58 +0200, J Wunsch wrote: We are, but why would we use anything else than GENERIC for it, seriously? I'd never roll a `release' for my current machine. When you get commitment to a fixed hardware configuration for two years and you want to leave your datacenter full of hosts ready to power up and play off a custom CDROM, a release that uses a custom kernel is desirable. That said, I don't think that the release should pick up KERNCONF. I think a middle-ground option is to have the release pick up RELEASE_KERNCONF. That is fine, but do note that Terry didn't add a new KERNCONF variable, it was already called that to begin with. We don't use buildkernel/installkernel in release, so it doesn't actually cause any conflicts. But anyways. Anyone have any reasonable objections to Terry's patch? If not I'll test it out for sanity and then commit it. Ciao, Sheldon. -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc Power Users Use the Power to Serve! - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Any chance of release patch being committed?
Sheldon Hearn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That said, I don't think that the release should pick up KERNCONF. I think a middle-ground option is to have the release pick up RELEASE_KERNCONF. That sounds best to me. -- cheers, Jorg .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL http://www.sax.de/~joerg/NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Any chance of release patch being committed?
Hello? I thought I had defended the reasons for my wanting the patch so that the KERNCONF in /usr/src/release/Makefile actually worked with sysinstall well enough that the patch should be committed... I haven't seen a commit go by... any chance of that change being committed? It doesn't really change the resulting code, unless KERNCONF is set to something other than GENERIC. Isn't anyone but me and Walnut Creek cum BSDI cum Windriver Systems using make release?!? Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Any chance of release patch being committed?
Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Isn't anyone but me and Walnut Creek cum BSDI cum Windriver Systems using make release?!? We are, but why would we use anything else than GENERIC for it, seriously? I'd never roll a `release' for my current machine. -- cheers, Jorg .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL http://www.sax.de/~joerg/NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Any chance of release patch being committed?
On Fri, 4 May 2001, J Wunsch wrote: Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Isn't anyone but me and Walnut Creek cum BSDI cum Windriver Systems using make release?!? We are, but why would we use anything else than GENERIC for it, seriously? I'd never roll a `release' for my current machine. Actually, I'd love to see a release rolled using NEWCARD for current.freebsd.org, so we can install using cardbus notebooks. This came up today actually... Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project [EMAIL PROTECTED] NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message