Subject: Re: New target in Makefile? build-kernel ?
To: Erik Anggard <email@example.com>
From: Rasputin <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/09/2002 12:25:46
* Erik Anggard <email@example.com> [020809 12:22]:
> Tomasz Luchowski wrote:
> >On Fri, Aug 09, 2002 at 11:04:13AM +0200, Dawid Szyma?ski wrote:
> >>What do you think about this patch?
> >>Would be nice to:
> >>1. make it possible to:
> >>make kernel-build conf=GENERIC
> >>make install-kernel
> >>(depends on environment it can be done out-off src tree)
> >>Comments please.
> >Ew, it looks so FreeBSDy. I don't support this idea. Say, someone
> >his kernel config file. He edits it over and over. It'd be wiser to make
> >"config" it until he gets this right, then let him "make" the kernel,
> >instead of
> >repeating the "kernel-build" all the time.
> >Just my humble opinion, I may well exagerate.
> Yes, it does look a lot like FreeBSD so if this is to be added why not
> use the same naming as FreeBSD so that people that use both won't get
> confused? FreeBSD uses this naming:
> make buildkernel KERNCONF=MYCONF
> make installkernel KERNCONF=MYCONF
> (And if KERNCONF is not specified GENERIC will be used.)
Yes, but the
make depend && make
process is common to all BSDs, isn't it? FreeBSd still supports that
(or did last time I used it), so I don't see a compatibility problem
Not to say it shouldn't be done, but I'm not sure there's a need....
Rasputin :: Jack of All Trades - Master of Nuns