Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 10:52:01, jhb (John Baldwin) wrote about "Two Junior Kernel
Hacker tasks..":
> 2) Build kernels in sys/compile/${MACHINE_ARCH}/FOO rather than sys/compile/FOO.
I'd like to qualify the whole idea to put compilation data in some subdirectory
of /usr/src as harmful. `make buildkernel' places it in more reasoned
place (but /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/compile/i386/zzz is IMHO preferrable than
current /usr/obj/usr/src/sys/zzz). Building in /usr/src/sys/compile is
legacy issue which should be IMO removed, and /usr/sbin/config should require
explicit way in its command line.
But this is bound with another /usr/src pollutions. E.g. one cannot place
kernel config in /etc and say "config /etc/kernel.config/nn12" without
moving it and current directory to /usr/src/sys/i386/conf or placing
symlink in it. LINT is also made in /usr/src/sys/${arch}/conf, not /etc
or subdirectory of /etc.
> This is very helpful when you share the same sys/ tree across several
> machines with different architectures. For example, I share the same sys/
> tree via NFS across almost all my testboxes including alpha and i386. Every
> time I want to compile GENERIC (I keep kernel.GENERIC up to date on my boxes)
> as part of an installworld I have to go manipulate symlinks (and/or shuffle
> directories around). Fixing this would make life for the non-x86 centric
> types a bit easier, although there'll probably be a big bikeshed over
> changing the build directory. *sigh*
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. ;|
/netch
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
