[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: do I really need "make-kpkg clean"?

On Thu, 05 May 2005 12:18:16 +0100, Jon Dowland <jon-dowland@ncl.ac.uk> said: 

> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Why does it have to be a make-kpkg option? It is simple enough to
>> do otherwise. I understand the kitchen sink mentality, but I really
>> do not want to read my email using make-kpkg (one emacs is enough).

> Forgive me if I'm wrong but, since make-kpkg calles the kernel build
> script's clean by default, where would be better to disable this
> than make-kpkg itself?

        Huh? The only time make-kpkg calls the kernel build script's
 clean  is in make-kpkg's clean target. When you tell make-kpkg to
 clean stuff, it calls the kernel's clean targets, which makes
 sense. Why would you want to disable this?

"Everyone is entitled to an *informed* opinion." Harlan Ellison
Manoj Srivastava     <srivasta@acm.org>    <http://www.golden-gryphon.com/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: