Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 27 Apr 2002 17:44:48 +0300
From:      Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>
Cc:        John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Makoto Matsushita <matusita@jp.FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src Makefile Makefile.inc1 src/etc Makefile src/
Message-ID:  <20020427144448.GJ35685@sunbay.com>
In-Reply-To: <20020427081845.GA328@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>
References:  <20020427033118.GA583@athlon.pn.xcllnt.net> <XFMail.20020427002332.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20020427081845.GA328@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--EVh9lyqKgK19OcEf
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Apr 27, 2002 at 01:18:45AM -0700, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2002 at 12:23:32AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> >=20
> > Now for a cross-release we need to make sure the binaries in /usr/obj
> > in the chroot are cross-built binaries.  Ruslan's current approach is
> > to do this by make step 3 be a cross-buildworld instead of a full world.
> > This means, then, that any tools for the new world you need for 4
> > need to be built as build-tools or cross-tools or the like.  What I'm
> > suggesting is instead to insert a step at 3.5 to do a cross-build world
> > and then we still have the right tools installed and don't have to worry
> > about using the right build/cross tools for the release scripts.
>=20
> I'm trying to figure out what the implied problem is you're trying
> to solve. I think it's the following:
>=20
> o  Compatibility between the release process and the tools it
>    uses (including features of the tools it expects).
>=20
> This is indeed best solved by doing a full world to populate the
> cdroot a second time, but now with bits that match the sources.
> The tools and the release are guatanteed to be in sync.
>=20
> The drawback is that the new tools may not run on the machine.
> Take for example a change in libc that requires a new syscall.
> The currently running kernel may not have the new syscall. It's
> for this reason that the upgrade process installs a new kernel
> before installing world. Thus, a full world step 3 creates a
> more dangerous incompatibility than it's trying to solve.
>=20
> The approach Ruslan takes is AFAICT the right approach. Of all
> the possible incompatibilities, he leaves the incompatibility
> between the tools and the release process unsolved. This is
> the one developers can maintain by hand in a fairly straight-
> forward way and thus the safest one to ignore in the automation.
>=20
> Did I extract your concern correctly?
>=20
Yes yes yes.  As I already wrote, I plan to replace (now OBE)
BOOTSTRAPUTILS with some real contents.


Cheers,
--=20
Ruslan Ermilov		Sysadmin and DBA,
ru@sunbay.com		Sunbay Software AG,
ru@FreeBSD.org		FreeBSD committer,
+380.652.512.251	Simferopol, Ukraine

http://www.FreeBSD.org	The Power To Serve
http://www.oracle.com	Enabling The Information Age

--EVh9lyqKgK19OcEf
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE8yrlgUkv4P6juNwoRAtXIAJwL3p/sfqC1j6da3ZdtI5kQSke4HgCghBOy
Nqn7zKz979j38FdZCxnjohM=
=gmTv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--EVh9lyqKgK19OcEf--

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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020427144448.GJ35685>