On Sep 23, at 03:45 PM, Matthew Seaman wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 09:32:26AM -0500, D J Hawkey Jr wrote:
> >
> > After applying patches, I bump $BRANCH in /sys/conf/newvers.sh, and would
> > like the running kernel to reflect the current patchlevel, but not at the
> > expense of a complete rebuild. Something this trivial shouldn't get me in
> > any trouble, kernel-wise, should it?
> >
> > Browsing Makefile.inc1, I see these defines:
> > -DNOCLEANDIR run ${MAKE} clean, instead of ${MAKE} cleandir
> > -DNOCLEAN do not clean at all
> >
> > Anyway, is it as simple as:
> > make buildkernel -DNOCLEAN KERNCONF=...
>
> So long as you aren't changing the kernel configuration, then you can
> probably use the 'old' build mechanism:
[SNIP]
> However, this is only worth doing if you're going to be recompiling
> the kernel a number of times, as the first time through it will
> compile everything.
Right! Most SAs these days don't effect the kernel. I usually leave
/usr/obj populated from the last build.
> Note that this won't put the object files
> etc. under /usr/obj...
Yeah, that's why I didn't want to do the "old" thang. I don't know
that it'd even work right.
But you seem to agree that something this trivial shouldn't yield a
broken kernel if /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/... is unchanged from the previous
build, right?
Dave
--
______________________ ______________________
\__________________ \ D. J. HAWKEY JR. / __________________/
\________________/\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /\________________/
http://www.visi.com/~hawkeyd/
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
