On Fri, 14 Jul 2000, Christoph Sold wrote:
A-Ha! Now we get closer to the problem... read on, suggestions follow...
"Daniel C. Sobral" wrote:
Christoph Sold wrote:
Summary of Officially Sanctioned Update Procedure:
make buildworld
make buildkernel
make
Christoph Sold wrote:
IMHO, when big changes like aout-elf, or, recently, new tool chain tools
make changes to the build process unavoidable, /prominent/ hints for
stupid stable-only-readers like me should be placed everywhere*) -- in
case of aout-elf, I was warned, so that went through.
On Tue, Jul 11, 2000 at 01:33:58PM -0500, Shawn Barnhart wrote:
I guess I don't care which tools I use, so long as they do the right
thing, and, most importantly THAT THE METHODS ARE TOTALLY DOCUMENTED
WITH ALL THE QUIRKS IN THE FSCK'N HANDBOOK AND NOT JUST IN THE MAILING
LIST ARCHIVE!
One
- Original Message -
From: "Nik Clayton" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| # cd /usr/gnats/docs
| # grep -i barnhart *
| #
|
| S'funny, this seems to be the first time you've told any of us. Next
| time, please use send-pr(1) with the category set to "docs". It would be
| appreciated if
Shawn Barnhart wrote:
I guess it's not a question of finding glaring errors that seemed worthy of
send-pr, but things I found misleading, confusing or outdated by "newer and
better" procedures like make buildkernel.
I got my commit bit by sending PRs which were as simple as typos
sometimes.
"Jordan K. Hubbard" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Once you add up his full benefit package (medical, dental, 401K,
insurance, etc) and salary, it still takes another 1199 of you to pay
for the rest of him just through buying CDs at full price, three times
a year.
[...]
To summarize, it counts, but
1. The other 1199 new FreeBSD CD-ROM customers you need to get, are they more
likely to be CVSUPping, mailing-list tracking, make-worlding-since-2.0.1
The people who buy the CDs tend to be more "expert" in nature, it's
the newcomers who generally FTP install the system.
experience?
In message 00b801bfeb66$94ab2960$9b239fc0@mobocracy "Shawn Barnhart" writes:
: I guess I don't care which tools I use, so long as they do the right
: thing, and, most importantly THAT THE METHODS ARE TOTALLY DOCUMENTED
: WITH ALL THE QUIRKS IN THE FSCK'N HANDBOOK AND NOT JUST IN THE MAILING
:
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Kris Kennaway wrote:
Well, I didn't see you very active with the 20-odd people who posted the
same build error this time around. And I think it makes much more sense to
teach people to use a tool which won't have dependency problems in the
first place than to catch them all
"KK" == Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
KK support after the fact, and so people should be using the buildkernel
KK target if they want their kernel builds to work across upgrades.
Which is a very different claim than saying you should *always* use
buildkernel, and no other method is
"KK" == Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
KK On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Vivek Khera wrote:
So you're saying that even after upgrading from 3.4 to 4.0 you should
use make buildkernel? That seems counter to what has been discussed
before, and is way non-BSD-ish.
KK Buildkernel internally
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Doug Barton wrote:
There is also the option of naming your kernel config file "kernel".
Yes, but some people don't like to name their children "kernel" for
whatever reason.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in
12 matches
Mail list logo
