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

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

The following reply was made to PR misc/39454; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Havard Eidnes <he%NetBSD.org@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost, bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost
Cc: misc-bug-people%netbsd.org@localhost, gnats-admin%netbsd.org@localhost,
 netbsd-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
Subject: Re: misc/39454: UPDATE build of amd64 bootcd fails to pick up new
 kernel
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 21:34:30 +0200 (CEST)

 >  > > 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 b=
 ootable
 >    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 It won't attempts to rebuild outdated binairies from sour=
 ces.
 >  - '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 IS=
 O
 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=3D1 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,
 
 - H=E5vard