Re: misc/39454: UPDATE build of amd64 bootcd fails to pick up new kernel

[Havard Eidnes <he%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

>  > > And why does not "release" dump the built bits into the
>  > > appropriate RELEASEDIR subdirectory?
>  >
>  > I think it does, but maybe not when run from the distrib/ dir.
>
>  To make is clear; here is what happens:
>
>  - 'make distribution' builds from sources, and update binairies in $DESTDIR,
>    and builds INSTALL kernels/ramdisks/boot media. This may include bootable
>    iso images without binary sets.
>  - 'make release' takes whatever is in $DESTDIR and build the release bits
>    from it. It won't attempts to rebuild outdated binairies from sources.
>  - 'make iso_image' takes whatever is in $RELEASEDIR and makes a
>    (possibly bootable) iso image from it.
>
>  You have to go though these 3 steps in order to have an updated from sources
>  iso image with binary sets.

Yes, I'm well aware of that, but that's not what started this
discussion.  I was asking for "how do I produce the boot-CD ISO images
with minimal expenditure of resources", and doing a full build does not
count as "minimal expenditure of resources" in my book.

I wanted to replicate what's done under "build.sh ... release".  The ISO
images which come out from this typically only contain a bootloader and
a "fat" INSTALL kernel, i.e. one with an embedded ramdisk with all the
install tools.

Such a method would be needed when repeatedly testing out fixes to the
kernel, and making a new boot-CD ISO image to try out the new INSTALL
kernel.

I think I've now understood that at least the lack of any output under
MAKEVERBOSE=1 in distrib/amd64/cdroms/ when doing "make release"
seriously threw me off course, as well as the "do nothing under
dependall, do everything under release" Makefile setup, both of them
serious and as far as I can see completely unneccessary POLA violations!

Regards,

- Håvard