On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 09:33:08 -0500
Kyle Evans <kev...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 9:27 AM Enji Cooper <yaneurab...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Sep 4, 2019, at 04:59, Poul-Henning Kamp <p...@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:
> > >
> > > On:
> > >
> > > Repository Root: svn+ssh://repo.freebsd.org/base
> > > Repository UUID: ccf9f872-aa2e-dd11-9fc8-001c23d0bc1f
> > > Revision: 351809
> > >
> > > I built a kernel, but drm-current-kmod did not get compiled
> > > from the new world order in /usr/local/sys/modules
> > >
> > > Debugging I ended up doing this to src/sys/conf/kern.post.mk:
> > >
> > > Index: sys/conf/kern.post.mk
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- sys/conf/kern.post.mk (revision 351809)
> > > +++ sys/conf/kern.post.mk (working copy)
> > > @@ -77,12 +77,14 @@
> > > ${target:S/^reinstall$/install/:S/^clobber$/cleandir/}
> > > .endif
> > > .for module in ${LOCAL_MODULES}
> > > -.if !empty(module)
> > > + true "XXX A $(module) 2 ${LOCALBASE} 3 ${LOCAL_MODULES} 4
> > > ${MODULES_WITH_WORLD}"
> > > +#.if !empty(module)
> > > + true "XXX B $(module) 2 ${LOCALBASE} 3 ${LOCAL_MODULES} 4
> > > ${MODULES_WITH_WORLD}"
> > > @${ECHODIR} "===> ${module}
> > > (${target:S/^reinstall$/install/:S/^clobber$/cleandir/})"
> > > @cd ${LOCAL_MODULES_DIR}/${module}; ${MKMODULESENV} ${MAKE} \
> > > DIRPRFX="${module}/" \
> > > ${target:S/^reinstall$/install/:S/^clobber$/cleandir/}
> > > -.endif
> > > +#.endif
> > > .endfor
> > > .endif
> > > .endfor
> > >
> > > This gives me the expected output from buildkernel:
> > >
> > > true "XXX A drm-current-kmod 2 /usr/local 3 drm-current-kmod 4 "
> > > true "XXX B drm-current-kmod 2 /usr/local 3 drm-current-kmod 4 "
> > >
> > > If I leave in the ".if !empty(module)" line in, I only get:
> > >
> > > true "XXX A drm-current-kmod 2 /usr/local 3 drm-current-kmod 4 "
> > >
> > > suggestions welcome...
> >
> > (CCing Kyle)
> >
> > This behavior change is probably caused by r351799.
> >
> > I personally think the code before Kyle___s change and after it was buggy.
> > It___s not word splitting LOCAL_MODULES before iterating over it.
> >
>
> I've backed out r351799 since it breaks usage of LOCAL_MODULES (though
> I really don't understand how empty works, apparently, and that makes
> me sad)... please advise on a correct path forward, because it's not
> clear to me.
>
In Kyle's defence my testing of his patch was only with
LOCAL_MODULES= and LOCAL_MODULES="" in /etc/src.conf. I don't
have any ports modules to be compiled with the kernel.
--
Gary Jennejohn
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
