On 11/22/12 1:17 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Eitan Adler <li...@eitanadler.com> wrote:
I've been working on removing obsolete information various documents.
While going through older articles I noticed a few references to the
"old style" kernel configuration involving running config(1) manually.
Is there any value in keeping this documented as an alternative to
"make buildkernel" or should it be treated as an implementation detail?
For new/non-advanced users, this shouldn't necessarily be exposed
except as an implementation detail and a historical artifact; more
directions, not less serve to confuse the masses -> see git as a
perfect example of this with all of its workflows.
I think the question that should be asked first is: who's your
target audience (remember, hackers are generally the more and not less
advanced target audience)? Once this question can be answered, I think
it would become apparent either to you and other reviewers what the
text should say.
The canonical way to build a kernel on its own is using config(8).
The Makefile acts as a convenient wrapper for this when you want
to make a kernel as part of a build, or to redo a kernel that was a
part of a build.
nearly all kernel developers I know use the config method, and it's widly
known and documented.
it is however a good way to get mismatching kernel and userland
but that's not what we are discussing.
Julian
Thanks,
Garrett
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
