make.conf file & CPUTYPE?

[Kris Kennaway]

On Tue, Dec 28, 2004 at 06:18:39AM +0000, jason henson wrote:
> On 12/25/04 20:58:12, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> >On Sat, Dec 25, 2004 at 08:17:00PM -0500, Gerard Seibert wrote:
> >> When I ran 'buildkernel' as well as 'buildworld', I used
> >> the 'CPUTYPE?=i686' directive in the 'make.conf' file. I was
> >wondering if
> >> it is correct to leave it in the 'make.conf' file now that I am
> >finished
> >> building a new kernel and updating the system. Would I be better  
> >off
> >if I
> >> just removed it, or changed it to 'CPUTYPE=i686'. I assumed that  
> >the
> >'?'
> >> was just for the 'buildworld' procedure.
> >
> >Setting it with ?= was a bug that was recently fixed.  You can cvsup
> >and continue to set it with =.
> >
> >Kris
> >
> What happened to march= in make.conf.  Has it been depreciated?

Not as such, but CPUTYPE does it better (because it also enables
cpu-specific asm code in some places, and you don't have to remember
gcc syntax).

Kris
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/attachments/20041227/092563fa/attachment.bin