Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 00:31:26 +0300 From: Valentin Nechayev <netch@iv.nn.kiev.ua> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.ORG>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Two Junior Kernel Hacker tasks.. Message-ID: <20010624003126.A735@iv.nn.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <3B34ECB7.CF7F4047@mindspring.com>; from tlambert2@mindspring.com on Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 12:23:35PM -0700 References: <XFMail.010622105201.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20010623081844.B982@iv.nn.kiev.ua> <3B34ECB7.CF7F4047@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 12:23:35, tlambert2 (Terry Lambert) wrote about "Re: Two Junior Kernel Hacker tasks..": > > make buildkernel is rather easy way to work it around: in > > any case object tree is machine-dependent, and one yet > > another directory does not destroy anything. ;| > The "make buildkernel" approach sucks for incremental > builds, since you are unable to avoid the "config" run > each time, and a lot of unnecessary stuff gets compiled > again because of opt_*.h files whose contents have not > changed (even if you defeat the clean of the compile > directory). It is mostly problem of current implementation. You can define some variables (NO_KERNELDEPEND, NOCLEAN, NO_KERNELCONFIG) and avoid it, if you are sure you can do it in this way. I said about the right idea to move last rarity - kernel building - outside from /usr/src, to /usr/obj or another object prefix. > The "make release" process has similar problems, for Of course, and `make buildworld' also. But for most cases -DNOCLEAN is enough to skip unnesessary steps. /netch To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010624003126.A735>