From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jul 16 20:16:12 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5CFC16A41C for ; Sat, 16 Jul 2005 20:16:12 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from minimarmot@gmail.com) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.200]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64E0543D46 for ; Sat, 16 Jul 2005 20:16:12 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from minimarmot@gmail.com) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i4so797577wra for ; Sat, 16 Jul 2005 13:16:11 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=IvAIo02VC4h6cHQLbYWhB4boC3QxkZ95gN5foQNm0G0dWFbRHZlDSGsqJmlDDtmpSDoHJRBEdHS4BRx/Re0Q/KiODB8ZZqYnDn0dPBZNzmZSpzgQYajfRFs+jTjmIR60oNSHSJfYNIVQqXoc8qQxcbdH+BHYCZdh+fjxEHDCBHE= Received: by 10.54.57.46 with SMTP id f46mr1486302wra; Sat, 16 Jul 2005 13:16:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.44.33 with HTTP; Sat, 16 Jul 2005 13:16:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <47d0403c050716131672b1d382@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 20:16:11 +0000 From: Ben Kaduk To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Subject: kernel build procedure for 5.4->6.0Beta X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Ben Kaduk List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 20:16:12 -0000 List -- I am in the process of upgrading via source build from 5.4-Release to 6.0Beta, and I am curious about a discrepancy in the kernel build procedure. The handbook has as a normal build procedure for a regular update to "make buildkernel; make installkernel", whereas UPDATING has just "make kernel". UPDATING, of course, has precedence, as stated in the handbook, but I am curious what (if any) difference there is in the two procedures, and why different procedures are preferred for these (seemingly similar) situations. Can anyone enlighten me? Thanks Ben Kaduk