From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Sat May 7 14:06:10 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33CA5B318AC; Sat, 7 May 2016 14:06:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from woodsb02@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wm0-x242.google.com (mail-wm0-x242.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::242]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B76FF1EB5; Sat, 7 May 2016 14:06:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from woodsb02@gmail.com) Received: by mail-wm0-x242.google.com with SMTP id r12so13118914wme.0; Sat, 07 May 2016 07:06:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to; bh=hnGy72LO1x1On27mPDXoR55YvJfFwk9xCKirHJr0/fg=; b=TPckiPU9LiV4Q4VT1Q31RrlsquRgDFjheEcm0+cyeZDyi/fKjpztE0ZDM09QRZvYDd c9weoqDfYI1BMPY2hiGMQ+7O51CJEXLgtTCj3D4VBeiz8iWSdw7bCzVOae/HxZxcWMpp 5se5Lg22mWdRkjveaC4ZeQQ3vjWfm0dYAalVmcMoGIJnn8wezIgrclaIn6D+1lYcsssn aTS4wtjdafYF0Eni4Itsv/GrUrHBl7S8zkH8YYNYUQdeX53gTDtZ4MMIh7rLkS0DNoe1 9VirzaTOwS6SLr+f2TmVEZh1XaYPBOGG6O+YsqZ2W/HZK0S86O1+iDB5GgVmDCZ7AwwL 4VEA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to; bh=hnGy72LO1x1On27mPDXoR55YvJfFwk9xCKirHJr0/fg=; b=Aokpv+YewS2F5IIBPOpJj2mDjdxkl0LIto+rfRCc+OOHght8P4RqGMZMXtuREAtVav /4ZA2Qk6UGx+fEAPEWfuFMFQL1ZdwjyLEmMGGAQ5qj+dtOd49AGcHcH2bM1zpZwO0Jp4 zxIzrEwyO+bBZUjdiJLHebuef4gKdKd/CgRPbS4VWTQABmQ+pBCinNCX2XHqLvAV3Fl3 hRM5QoALhvcsM2emMSVNdNp9GHh8FrkCObkIKjrMunkqBG8d/W2nyE0GcyGsV8eL38Vc 0bZ8mglwHdUiAHTf3K2jixNg6SCbXw8HoXLYgpg5LcPGGfUCFYDQ+iYDjECVTuZfIg5E K8Eg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FWvBz7e4rEM0crrJ1xztgi2HxYewLiXwwDUf1dyYeMGmF8ZXN3Y0YsVjLontkH4kvwrqiKji7i2zSLTrw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.189.231 with SMTP id gl7mr26631982wjc.129.1462629968328; Sat, 07 May 2016 07:06:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.16.201 with HTTP; Sat, 7 May 2016 07:06:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160507135005.GN62286@albert.catwhisker.org> References: <20160506221151.GN1362@FreeBSD.org> <7018EDCD-A567-446D-965C-9E886D543238@gmail.com> <20160507074159.GC47527@FreeBSD.org> <1CCC4F95-D01E-4A5E-A744-5FE2ECA3D8FB@gmail.com> <20160507135005.GN62286@albert.catwhisker.org> Date: Sat, 7 May 2016 16:06:08 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS and PkgBase From: Ben Woods To: "freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org" , FreeBSD Current , Ben Woods Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.22 X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 May 2016 14:06:10 -0000 On Saturday, 7 May 2016, David Wolfskill wrote: > > > If you list 2 kernels in the KERNCONF variable, why is it astonishing > that > > 2 kernels get installed? Even if the old behaviour was to only install 1 > > kernel, if you are listing 2 kernels in KERNCONF presumably that is > because > > you want to install 2 kernels? > > Errr... no: I don't. At least, not on the machine where I built them. > > The process I've been using (with "variations on the theme" over the > years) since around 1999 or so for updating my "production" machines at > home is described in some detail at > ; in summary, the > production machines (only) mount /usr/src & /usr/obj from a dedicated > "build machine" via NFS during the "upgrade window," during which time > the production machine's kernel & userland are installed (from the build > machine, which had built them). > > The build machine does all of the compilation; each production machine > merely does installation. > > There is no value in "installing" the production machine kernels on the > build machine -- and I never configured the build machine with the > expectation that the root filesystem would ever need to be big enough to > store kernels that would never be loaded on that machine. > > Fundamentally, just as we separate "build{world,kernel}" targets from > "install{world,kernel}" targets, it is appopriate to separate -- and not > conflate -- building of a kernel on a machine from installing that kernel > on that machine. > Thanks for the explanation - the use case and POLA are clear to me now. Perhaps we need the "make packages" to somehow ignore this variable, as it makes that would not want to install multiple kernels on a machine, but that you may want to build multiple kernel packages anyway, for use on other machines? Regards, Ben -- -- From: Benjamin Woods woodsb02@gmail.com