Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 11:20:38 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Johann Kois <jkois@freebsd.org> Cc: Remko Lodder <remko@elvandar.org>, doc-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, cvs-doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/kernelconfig chapter.sgml Message-ID: <4D77C4F6.1080709@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <4D7750A0.6010705@FreeBSD.org> References: <201103081746.p28HkCh0017043@repoman.freebsd.org> <20110308175140.GZ78089@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <4D76746A.6050801@FreeBSD.org> <BFC9B0C9-5BB3-477A-87F9-AE3BBB862229@elvandar.org> <4D7750A0.6010705@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 03/09/2011 03:04, Johann Kois wrote: > On 08.03.2011 19:48, Remko Lodder wrote: >> On Mar 8, 2011, at 7:24 PM, Johann Kois wrote: >> >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> Hash: SHA1 >>> >>> On 03/08/2011 18:51, Kostik Belousov wrote: >>>> On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 05:46:12PM +0000, Johann Kois wrote: >>>>> jkois 2011-03-08 17:46:12 UTC >>>>> >>>>> FreeBSD doc repository >>>>> >>>>> Modified files: >>>>> en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/kernelconfig chapter.sgml >>>>> Log: >>>>> PR: docs/150124 >>>>> >>>>> Fix/Update the instructions on "how to build a custom kernel". >>>>> >>>>> - The fact that you need the whole source tree for this is well hidden at the moment. >>>> I do not believe this is true. Kernel should not have dependencies >>>> outside sys/. >>> Well that was definitely true in the old days. But things have changed >>> a couple of years ago. >>> >>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbfullook/kernelconfig/chapter.sgml >>> (Revision 1.157). >>> >>> Or http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=75864 >>> >>> Regards. >>> >>> >>> jkois >> >> >> With Kostik's response included; should we go for the 'alternatively to only build the kernel do the "old" mumbojumbo' ? >> > Hi all, > > what about some hard facts instead of "...may work..." "...should > work..." and "...I believe..."? ;-) > > Can we guarantee 100 % that the "traditional method" still works? If > not, then the "traditional way" should stay where it is now (in the > developers handbook): I can 100% guarantee that the old method works on every release of FreeBSD from 2.1.2 through FreeBSD-current, as well as nearly all weigh points in between. Where it doesn't work, the new method doesn't work either (eg the build is completely broken). The number of preconditions for the old way is higher than the new way, but it still works and will continue to work. The 'buildkernel' way minimizes the number of preconditions, and is why we recommend it to people merely building the kernel, as opposed to doing heavy development where the old method has some advantages (which is why it is still working). It is a design point of the kernel that it depends on nothing outside of the src/sys tree to build (assuming up-to-date tools). It is a bug that we would fix if the old method failed to work on a tree that has only src/sys in it. Warner > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/developers-handbook/kernelbuild.html: > > "Up to version 4.X of FreeBSD this was the recommended way to build a > new kernel. It can still be used on newer versions (instead of the > “buildkernel” target of the toplevel /usr/src/ makefiles). Building the > kernel this way may be useful when working on the kernel code and it may > actually be faster than the “New” procedure when only a single option or > two were tweaked in the kernel configuration file. On the other hand, it > might lead to unexpected kernel build breakage when used by beginners on > newer versions of FreeBSD." > > And the handbook (targeted not only but especially at new/less > experienced users) should describe the method we have recommended for > the last 5 years now (in the handbook and in the developers-handbook). > > Regards. > > jkois > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4D77C4F6.1080709>