From: Frederick Bruckman <fb@enteract.com>
Subject: Re: make build
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 1999 08:59:01 -0500 (CDT)

> I'm not following you. 

Oops.

> "make release" does a "make build", then makes
> the tarballs. "make build" compiles and installs the new binaries in
> place. If it's just for that one machine, "make build" is all you need.

I see.
 
> > LC520 (68030/25 with fpu) 36mb ram/160mb intenal & 1gb external HDD
> 
> On the 840AV, it took ~24 hours to build the exportable release, so
> your result isn't surprising. If you're following -current frequently,
> you can shave a few hours by skipping the man pages, as "make MKMAN=no
> build". Also, when you upgrade the compiler, as with 1.4.x -> 1.5x,
> you really should "make build" ***twice***, but note that you never
> need to build man pages for the first "bootstrap" build.
> 
> If you leave your tree populated, you may be able to save quite a bit
> of time with "make UPDATE=1 BUILD=1 build", but _be_ _careful_. If
> anything is moved your build may break, and you have no right to
> complain until you've done "make clean" and tried again. If you're
> going to use UPDATE, "sup" is out, because it backdates the files and
> messes things all up. UPDATE should work better with "anoncvs".
> 
> Best to ask for details on current-users. Except for the amount of
> time involved, the build works about the same on all ports. If there
> is something broken just on mac68k, be sure to file pr's and whine
> loudly. Otherwise, what's the point of running -current?
> ;-)

Thanks. 
Right you are.

---
Shigeki Uno