Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-09 Thread David Wolfskill
On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 12:43:42PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > ... > > I suppose there's probably some way to arrange things so the KERNCONF > > specification in /etc/src.conf has one value during "buildkernel" and a > > different value during "inistallkernel" -- but ... seriously...??!? > > One

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-09 Thread John Baldwin
On Monday, May 09, 2016 11:45:44 AM David Wolfskill wrote: > On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 11:05:55AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > On Saturday, May 07, 2016 06:50:05 AM David Wolfskill wrote: > > > [Recipient list trimmed a bit -- dhw] > > ... > > > > 2 kernels get installed? Even if the old

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-09 Thread Glen Barber
On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 11:46:02AM -0700, Freddie Cash wrote: > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Ultima wrote: > > > If multiple kernels are being installed like this, eg KERNCONF="FOO BAR", > > which of the two would be default during boot? FOO because it came first? > >

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-09 Thread Freddie Cash
On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Ultima wrote: > If multiple kernels are being installed like this, eg KERNCONF="FOO BAR", > which of the two would be default during boot? FOO because it came first? ​Correct. At least, that's the way it's worked in the past, and

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-09 Thread David Wolfskill
On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 11:05:55AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > On Saturday, May 07, 2016 06:50:05 AM David Wolfskill wrote: > > [Recipient list trimmed a bit -- dhw] > ... > > > 2 kernels get installed? Even if the old behaviour was to only install 1 > > > kernel, if you are listing 2 kernels in

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-09 Thread Ultima
If multiple kernels are being installed like this, eg KERNCONF="FOO BAR", which of the two would be default during boot? FOO because it came first? On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 2:05 PM, John Baldwin wrote: > On Saturday, May 07, 2016 06:50:05 AM David Wolfskill wrote: > > [Recipient

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-09 Thread John Baldwin
On Saturday, May 07, 2016 06:50:05 AM David Wolfskill wrote: > [Recipient list trimmed a bit -- dhw] > > I'm speaking up here because IIRC, I whined to Gleb at what I perceived > to be a POLA violation a while back > > On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 09:59:06AM +0200, Ben Woods wrote: > > On 7 May

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-09 Thread Thomas Mueller
I don't really know what to quote here, but the documentation is not clear. There ought to be something in UPDATING. Issue is building and installing more than one kernel. I tried once, and it didn't work right. I had to go back to one kernel at a time and NO_MODULES=yes on second and

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-07 Thread Ben Woods
On Saturday, 7 May 2016, David Wolfskill wrote: > > > If you list 2 kernels in the KERNCONF variable, why is it astonishing > that > > 2 kernels get installed? Even if the old behaviour was to only install 1 > > kernel, if you are listing 2 kernels in KERNCONF presumably

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-07 Thread David Wolfskill
[Recipient list trimmed a bit -- dhw] I'm speaking up here because IIRC, I whined to Gleb at what I perceived to be a POLA violation a while back On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 09:59:06AM +0200, Ben Woods wrote: > On 7 May 2016 at 09:48, Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya) > wrote: >

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-07 Thread Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya)
> On May 7, 2016, at 00:59, Ben Woods wrote: > > On 7 May 2016 at 09:48, Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya) > wrote: > glebius changed the defaults to fix POLA, but the naming per the behavior is > confusing. Right now the behavior between ^/head and

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-07 Thread Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya)
> On May 7, 2016, at 00:46, Ben Woods wrote: > > > On 7 May 2016 at 09:41, Glen Barber wrote: > I think this raises a larger question - did "something" change that > otherwise violates POLA? The commit recently was intended to revert > a POLA violation,

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-07 Thread Ben Woods
On 7 May 2016 at 09:48, Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya) wrote: > glebius changed the defaults to fix POLA, but the naming per the behavior > is confusing. Right now the behavior between ^/head and ^/stable/10 > before/now match -- I just had to wrap my mind around the default

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-07 Thread Glen Barber
On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 09:46:03AM +0200, Ben Woods wrote: > On 7 May 2016 at 09:41, Glen Barber wrote: > > > I think this raises a larger question - did "something" change that > > otherwise violates POLA? The commit recently was intended to revert > > a POLA violation, so

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-07 Thread Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya)
> On May 7, 2016, at 00:41, Glen Barber wrote: > > On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 12:35:10AM -0700, Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya) wrote: >> (Replying because I kicked the hornet’s nest when my build failed) >> Hi Ben, >> >>> On May 7, 2016, at 00:27, Ben Woods

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-07 Thread Ben Woods
On 7 May 2016 at 09:41, Glen Barber wrote: > I think this raises a larger question - did "something" change that > otherwise violates POLA? The commit recently was intended to revert > a POLA violation, so maybe I am not entirely clear on what branch this > affects. > > Are we

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-07 Thread Glen Barber
On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 12:35:10AM -0700, Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya) wrote: > (Replying because I kicked the hornet’s nest when my build failed) > Hi Ben, > > > On May 7, 2016, at 00:27, Ben Woods wrote: > > > > On Saturday, 7 May 2016, Glen Barber wrote: >

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-07 Thread Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya)
(Replying because I kicked the hornet’s nest when my build failed) Hi Ben, > On May 7, 2016, at 00:27, Ben Woods wrote: > > On Saturday, 7 May 2016, Glen Barber wrote: > >> With 'installkernel', the first kernel listed in KERNCONF is installed >> as the

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-07 Thread Glen Barber
On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 09:27:54AM +0200, Ben Woods wrote: > On Saturday, 7 May 2016, Glen Barber wrote: > > > With 'installkernel', the first kernel listed in KERNCONF is installed > > as the default (/boot/kernel), and subsequent kernels are installed with > > the kernel name

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-07 Thread Ben Woods
On Saturday, 7 May 2016, Glen Barber wrote: > With 'installkernel', the first kernel listed in KERNCONF is installed > as the default (/boot/kernel), and subsequent kernels are installed with > the kernel name included in the path (/boot/kernel.${INSTKERNNAME}). In > both

Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase

2016-05-06 Thread Glen Barber
On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 12:08:28AM +0200, Ben Woods wrote: > Hi everyone, > > The commit in r299088 changes the behaviour for building multiple kernels > when the KERNCONF value contains multiple (space-separated) kernel conf > names. > https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision=299088 > >