On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 08:28:32PM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <20040713182351.GA72492_at_pit.databus.com>, Barney Wolff writes: > >On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 01:05:45PM -0500, Jason Dusek wrote: > >> > >> I ran make world this morning. I ran make kernel as well, but the kernel is > >> broken, so I kept my old kernel. Does this mean that I have a RELEASE > >> kernel but a CURRENT world? Am I headed for trouble? > > > >To core: > >How many users do we have to sabotage with "make world" before it gets > >removed from the make targets? Is it really that hard in the very rare > >case when "make buildworld && make installworld" is what's wanted to > >type exactly that? > > And your argument here is that people are reciprocally less likely > to hose (or as it may be: not hose) their systems because the have > to type 27 characters more to do so ? Yes. That's why there are safeties on guns. Or, since I'm using US metaphors, "make world" could be considered an attractive nuisance, like an unfenced swimming pool. -- Barney Wolff http://www.databus.com/bwresume.pdf I'm available by contract or FT, in the NYC metro area or via the 'Net.Received on Tue Jul 13 2004 - 16:52:01 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:01 UTC