From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Nov 24 07:49:59 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA04469 for freebsd-stable-outgoing; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 07:49:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from calis.BlackSun.org (slip-ppp-4-191.escape.com [205.160.46.191]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id HAA04463 for ; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 07:49:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from don@calis.BlackSun.org) Received: from localhost (don@localhost) by calis.BlackSun.org (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA47668; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 10:49:16 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from don@calis.BlackSun.org) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 10:49:15 -0500 (EST) From: Don To: Dom Mitchell cc: "Foster, Jim" , FreeBSD-Stable Subject: Re: CVSupit, make and floppies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I find that an out-of-date config is not a problem, and easily fixed if > come across. Particularly so in a -stable world. > > I am more concerned that a userland utility will need a new feature in > the kernel, which will not be present if I reboot first. Who said anything about rebooting before compiling and installing a new kernel. > Seperating the builds also means that it is harder to script together. I dont know about you but I fail to see where one needs to script the command "make world" - As for kernel compiles I have found that it is a much better idea not to script this stuff. I use to do have scripts to do all of this but since I started running 3.0 on a few boxes the scripts were failing often enough that I realized I should be paying more attention to what was happening when these commands execute. > > There is also no reason to boot into single user mode to install the > > world unless it is a major upgrade such as from 2.2.7-3.0. > > I prefer to make installworld in single user mode to avoid clobbering > daemons executable files. To my mind "it's just safer". I dont really see any difference here. As soon as the install is done the daemons that get started afterward run using the newer versions. besides which I always reboot after the kernel compile which is just a few minutes later anyway. In the end it comes down to personal preference. I have had kernel compiles die often enough because of an out of date config that I wont compile a new kernel without a new userland first. What good does a script do if you have an out of date config? you still have to manually make a new config and that defeats the ease of the scripting in the first place. The whole idea of scripting all of this stuff is fine provided you pay propper attention to the output of those scripts. I find it is simply eaiser to execute the commands and watch them. As for scripting being harder if build and install arent done seperately .... I fail to see why. In fact, one really shouldnt put the kernel compile and the userland compile into one script. When things fail for whatever reason you dont want 10 other commands executing anyway. This is just an opinion and I am sure 100 other people have 100 other opinions :) -Don To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message