On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 06:22:42PM +0300, Andrey Beresovsky wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> PP> I was wondering about that when I saw your PR; actually, I think that
> PP> the current FreeBSD kernel building infrastructure is quite sufficient
> PP> for what you want to do, without any more modifications.
> PP> Why do you need different source trees and kernel config dirs? I see no
> PP> problem with keeping all kernel configs for the same version of FreeBSD
> PP> in the same src/sys/<arch>/conf/ directory, or at least keeping symlinks
> PP> to different files in the same src/sys/<arch>/conf/ directory.
> PP> Different source trees - if you have a source tree checked out to use
> PP> for building the kernel, what is stopping you from invoking the
> PP> 'buildkernel' target from the corresponding src/ directory, the one
> PP> directly above the sys/ directory?
> My project involves automatic or semiautomatic checkouts, updates and
> removals of source trees. It would be unwise to keep kernel configs in this
> source trees. Thats why I need to change KRNLCONFDIR variable. Of course, I
> can do it with the help of links, but I think it's not a good solution.
> I guess the changes I suggest will definitely not break anything but only add
> flexibility which is typical for BSD make files.
> The solution with links is not a right thing, because it involves more dirty
> work which can be avoided with a help of simple makefile modification.
KRNLCONFDIR shouldn't be overridden -- we already provide (undocumented)
user-redefineable KERNCONFDIR which should be used in cases like this.
KRNLCONFDIR, on the other hand, is dependent on src/ used, and should
NOT be overridden.
Ruslan Ermilov Sysadmin and DBA,
firstname.lastname@example.org Sunbay Software AG,
ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer,
+380.652.512.251 Simferopol, Ukraine
http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve
http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age