In article <199512172309.KAA13118@werple.net.au> cimaxp1!jb@werple.net.au (John Birrell) writes:
>Greg Hudson wrote..
>> 
>> I'd like to propose a new scheme for doing builds out of a read-only
>> source tree, and make an argument for why I think it's as convenient
>[lots deleted]
>> 
>> Comments?  Do people like this?  Do people go "ewww?"  Can people
>> think of simpler ideas?  The lack of a good system for doing NetBSD
>> builds out of a read-only source tree has caused some problems here.
>
>My Christmas list includes a 'read-only source tree'. 8-). I've had
>problems building two architectures against the same source. So much so,
>I sup to one tree, then copy the tree to the different machines, and then
>do a build. What a pain!
>
>I can't comment on the way of achieving this 'cause I only ever use
>make and makefiles the way they come with NetBSD. 
>
>It certainly _is_ worth doing IMHO.

I make /usr/obj a symbolic link that points to different places on
different machines, and then change BSDOBJDIR in bsd.own.mk.

christos