lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Nov]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Why INSTALL_PATH is not /boot by default?
Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 01:27:15AM +0100, Blaisorblade wrote:
>
>>This line, in the main Makefile, is commented:
>>
>>export INSTALL_PATH=/boot
>>
>>Why? It seems pointless, since almost everything has been for ages requiring
>>this settings, and distros' versions of installkernel have been taking an
>>empty INSTALL_PATH as meaning /boot for ages (for instance Mandrake). It's
>>maybe even mandated by the FHS (dunno).
>>
>>Is there any reason I'm missing?
>
>
> Changing this may have impact on default behaviour of some versions of
> installkernel.
> If /boot is ok for other than just i386 we can give it a try.
>

Please note that there are cases where you build a kernel for machine x
on machine y. Which means: don't unconditionally uncomment this line.

--
Andreas Steinmetz SPAMmers use robotrap@domdv.de
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:08    [W:0.230 / U:0.208 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site