--zhXaljGHf11kAtnf
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 08:07:29PM -0800, Aaron J. Grier wrote:
> 'make depend' first, perhaps?

Should the build process not do that on its own, though?

For what it's worth, I decided that I must have irreparably
corrupted my sources somewhere (despite the fact that a cvs update
-dP dumped to a file turned up only a couple of modified or merged
files, which I blew away my copies of and reupdated).

I grabbed a new copy of the sources last night, cvs updated that,
and left the machine building when I walked off to class this
morning. I'll know shortly whether or not it worked this time and,
if so, write it up to some (as yet undetermined) blunder on my part.

Side note: what is the "appropriate" way to build NetBSD in the new
world? Is it still acceptable to do things like "make release", or
are we obligated somehow to use build.sh? Is a mixture of the two
usages of the source tree a complete no-no, or is build.sh just
meant to be (as it seems to be) a user-friendly interface into the
Makefile commands?

--=20
       ~ g r @ eclipsed.net

--zhXaljGHf11kAtnf
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (NetBSD)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAjvgHc8ACgkQ9ehacAz5CRrpTQCgsyON1TWpkiUZea4vr5TUhiY1
hegAnA3wvEUnrD/2qENn4HBTcaS2GRTO
=m9+O
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--zhXaljGHf11kAtnf--