Re: Usability Of NOCLEAN

[Garance A Drosihn]

At 12:37 PM -0600 3/6/04, Peter Schultz wrote:
Hi,

I'm just curious about the usability of NOCLEAN.  If I've just
updated world and things are fine with the installation, is it
considered safe to use NOCLEAN?
If we thought that behavior was always safe, then that would
be the default behavior.  It is not the default behavior,
because it is not always safe...
A couple updates to libc came in this morning just after I
installed a fresh world and I'm wondering what others do in
cases like this.
I rarely use NOCLEAN.  If there *are* problems due to some
junk being left around, then the time I will lose to debugging
those problems is bound to be much larger than the amount I
save by using NOCLEAN.  (and I have run into such problems,
back when I did make NOCLEAN builds much more often).
The only times I use NOCLEAN is if something died in buildworld
or installworld.  If I can find the ONE update to fix that
problem, then I'll fix it and use NOCLEAN to rebuild world.  I
do not cvsup for "all new updates", though.  I only pick up
the update(s) which fix the specific problem I'm seeing.  It
is very annoying to cvsup to pick up one fix, only to find
out that you also picked up a *different* breakage...
I doubt I would ever use NOCLEAN for updates to libc.  My
feeling is that if I don't have time to do a normal build,
then I also won't have the time to deal with any problems
that might come up from a NOCLEAN build.
There is *always* another set of "interesting-looking" updates
being committed to freebsd.  If I have just finished a successful
buildworld, then I almost always wait at least a week before
I do another one.
This is only describing my own habits, of course.  Obviously
there are many times when you *can* get away with a NOCLEAN
build.  It's one of those things which is very useful when
you know what you're doing, but it isn't always safe to do.
--
Garance Alistair Drosehn=   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Systems Programmer   or  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rensselaer Polytechnic Instituteor  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: Usability Of NOCLEAN

[Kris Kennaway]

On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 12:37:29PM -0600, Peter Schultz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm just curious about the usability of NOCLEAN.  If I've just updated 
> world and things are fine with the installation, is it considered safe 
> to use NOCLEAN?  A couple updates to libc came in this morning just 
> after I installed a fresh world and I'm wondering what others do in 
> cases like this.

You can often use it, except when you can't.  It's mostly safe when
you only have minor changes, but at the first sign of trouble you
should re-run without NOCLEAN, and never report a build failure from a
NOCLEAN world because it's likely to be your fault :-)

Kris


pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Usability Of NOCLEAN

[Kent Stewart]

On Saturday 06 March 2004 10:37 am, Peter Schultz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm just curious about the usability of NOCLEAN.  If I've just
> updated world and things are fine with the installation, is it
> considered safe to use NOCLEAN?  A couple updates to libc came in
> this morning just after I installed a fresh world and I'm wondering
> what others do in cases like this.
>

I use NOCLEAN when I have had a build die. If I can fix it, I do and 
then continue on with NOCLEAN. If changes to something like libc come 
in, every module on your system may use it and I don't think a NOCLEAN 
is appropriate.

You don't have to update for every little change that comes across. Why 
fix something if it isn't broken :).

Kent

-- 
Kent Stewart
Richland, WA

http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"