Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 22 Jan 2001 15:42:31 -0600 (CST)
From:      Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>
To:        John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc:        Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org>, Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, "Donald J . Maddox" <dmaddox@sc.rr.com>Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.ORG>,
Subject:   Re: lastest kernel from cvs ( sh exists with signal 8 )
Message-ID:  <14956.43335.171799.155466@guru.mired.org>
In-Reply-To: <XFMail.010122133417.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <200101222049.f0MKnv912117@harmony.village.org> <XFMail.010122133417.jhb@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.ORG> types:
> 
> On 22-Jan-01 Warner Losh wrote:
> > In message <14956.39955.318792.388889@guru.mired.org> Mike Meyer writes:
> >: Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org> types:
> >: > It is in the handbook, and has been for some time.  I'm reviewing the
> >: > recent KERNEL -> KERNCONF changes to make sure that they make it into
> >: > the handbook properly (I assume there will be a MFC in a few days,
> >: > since putting KERNEL in /etc/make.conf is a setup for disaster right
> >: > now).
> >: 
> >: Could you also make sure it makes it into /etc/defaults/make.conf
> >: (KERNEL isn't mentioned there at all) and make.conf(5)?
> > 
> > That's really Peter's job since he made the change without any lead
> > time at all to resolve issues like this.  I'll see what I can do to
> > backstop things, but it really isn't my baby.  When people change
> > things that have impact in different parts of the whole tree, they
> > should be the ones to make the changes to those different parts of the
> > tree, or at least submit patches to the maintainers of those parts of
> > the tree.
> Erm, if it wasn't documented in the first place, making a change doesn't
> put the burden of documenting the old behavior on the person making the change.
> Are there any kernel manpages for all of the oldcard and newcard API's floating
> around btw?  (As an example.)  I agree it should be documented, but just
> because Peter made the change doesn't mean that the onus that the people who
> originally did buildkernel didn't bother to document it in places like
> make.conf(5) should fall on Peter.

KERNEL is documented in make.conf(5), but not in
/etc/defaults/make.conf. Since the only thing in the latter that's
anything other than a comment is BDECFLAGS, I suggested nuking most of
/etc/defaults/make.conf and putting in a pointer to make.conf(5). That
way, this stuff only needs to be documented in one place.

	<mike
--
Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>			http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/
Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?14956.43335.171799.155466>