On 23-Jun-01 Peter Pentchev wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 12:23:35PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
>> > make buildkernel is rather easy way to work it around: in
>> > any case object tree is machine-dependent, and one yet
>> > another directory does not destroy anything. ;|
>>
>> The "make buildkernel" approach sucks for incremental
>> builds, since you are unable to avoid the "config" run
>> each time, and a lot of unnecessary stuff gets compiled
>> again because of opt_*.h files whose contents have not
>> changed (even if you defeat the clean of the compile
>> directory).
>
> About the release process, you are right, it is a bit harder
> to restart without some tweaks, but the buildkernel target
> is about as restartable as it can be. (I really don't think
> anyone would ever advocate skipping the config(8) or
> the 'make depend' stage..)
Actually, make depend takes a relatively long time, and when
I'm hacking on a kernel, I don't want to wait 15 minutes to
build a kernel after changing one file. I compile kernels
w/o config or make depend a lot.
--
John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
