Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 12:23:35, tlambert2 (Terry Lambert) wrote about "Re: Two Junior
Kernel Hacker tasks..":
> > 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).
It is mostly problem of current implementation. You can define some
variables (NO_KERNELDEPEND, NOCLEAN, NO_KERNELCONFIG) and avoid it,
if you are sure you can do it in this way.
I said about the right idea to move last rarity - kernel building - outside
from /usr/src, to /usr/obj or another object prefix.
> The "make release" process has similar problems, for
Of course, and `make buildworld' also. But for most cases -DNOCLEAN is enough
to skip unnesessary steps.
/netch
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
