svn commit: r299086 - head

[Warner Losh]

BTW, why is this a new NO_XXXX thing? It should be MK_XXXX instead...

Warner

On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 6:47 PM, Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya) <
yaneurabeya at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> > On May 4, 2016, at 17:31, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 02:06:33PM -0700, Ngie Cooper (yaneurabeya)
> wrote:
> > N>
> > N> > On May 4, 2016, at 14:00, Garrett Cooper <ngie at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> > N> >
> > N> > Author: ngie
> > N> > Date: Wed May  4 21:00:41 2016
> > N> > New Revision: 299086
> > N> > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/299086
> > N> >
> > N> > Log:
> > N> >  Default NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS to "no" to unbreak the build
> > N> >
> > N> >  MFC after: soon (was insta-MFCed -_-..)
> > N> >  Pointyhat to: glebius
> > N> >  Sponsored by: EMC / Isilon Storage Division
> > N> >
> > N> > Modified:
> > N> >  head/Makefile.inc1
> >
> > Defaulting it to "no" you changed the behaviour backwards, which is
> > wrong.
>
> Agreed. That’s why I inverted it back to “yes” in r299088.
>
> > N> This broke for me on 11.0-CURRENT because I use:
> > N>
> > N> KERNCONFS= GENERIC GENERIC-NODEBUG
> > N>
> > N> and use installkernel with INSTKERNNAME.
> >
> > That's quite specific setup. Probably NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS should
> > be played with conditionally.
>
> It’s not an uncommon setup though. I have used it on all my CURRENT
> machines for some time because I might want to be able to use INVARIANTS
> kernels sometimes when doing kernel changes, and boot !INVARIANTS kernels
> all of the time.
>
> I chose "?= yes” because it’s better syntactic sugar than
> `defined(NO_INSTALLEXTRAKERNELS) && ${NO_INSTALLKERNELS} != “yes”` and it
> works with pre-bmake (the other idiom that bmake allows that would work
> here… although with more duplicity is `:Uyes`, which would break
> installkernel on FreeBSD 9 machines or with fmake as the system make).
>
> Thanks!
> -Ngie
>