Re: better way to build libraries..

From: John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j_at_resnet.uoregon.edu>
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2006 14:56:43 -0700
Warner Losh wrote this message on Sun, Oct 01, 2006 at 14:08 -0600:
> In message: <20060928231816.GI80527_at_funkthat.com>
>             John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j_at_resnet.uoregon.edu> writes:
> : Comments?  Improvements?
> 
> Generally, libraries are considered to be a critical part of the
> system.  They often have many different interdependencies.  This is
> why we have buildworld: to account for them.  If you make the patches
> that you describe, then you break the upgrade path for people with
> older systems.

I don't see how adding the ability to do stand alone builds breaks
others ability to upgrade their systems through normal means (i.e.
buildworld)...

> You don't need to do a complete buildworld either to get new
> libraries.  However, teasing out the parts that you do and don't need

Yes you do, if you don't want to break your existing install by doing
a make includes....

> can be a chore.  Maybe we should enhance the build system to be able
> to say 'rebuild just the libraries w/o rebuilding the toolchain'.

IMO, even building just the libraries is a bit much...

I would like to integrate this into bsd.lib.mk so that if you use
bsd.lib.mk you automaticly get what my patch proposes, but my make-fu
is weak...  I will admit this will be a bit redundant for buildworld,
but it could be easily turned off in that case...

-- 
  John-Mark Gurney				Voice: +1 415 225 5579

     "All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not."
Received on Sun Oct 01 2006 - 19:56:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:01 UTC