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

[Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost>]

On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 09:34:30PM +0200, Havard Eidnes wrote:
> >  > > 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 It won't attempts to rebuild outdated binairies from sources.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!

Actually, the "do nothing under dependall, do everything under release" part
can't easily be avoided; because distrib/ isn't self-contained. It depends
on 'dependall' having being run over the whole tree to work.

I'm not sure why MAKEVERBOSE=1 doens't work; the commands do show up in my
make log even without MAKEVERBOSE=1.

-- 
Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost>
     NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--