1.1

Joseph Jezak wrote:
> I don't have a problem with the "cp crap".  It's obvious what it
> does and make install doesn't work on all architectures.  "make
> install" isn't as explicit and may introduce other issues.
> 
> -Joe

Well, alrighty then. I hadn't figured "make install" would change its
behavior so much on different platforms. Fortunately, I'd only commented
out that stuff in a couple of handbooks, so I'll go back and revert that
change.

I did, however, have to fix some instances where the directions referred
to cping vmmlinuz, but the *-bootloader files talked about vmlinux.
That'll be the only thing to remain changed.

What about just leaving it for x86+amd64? the "make install" copies
everything properly for me whether or not /boot is a separate partition,
and since I actually have the hardware (a whole 2 arches ;)), I can say
with certainty it causes no issues.

I'm always surprised when people find out there's a "make install"
command to begin with -- it seems like it's one of the best-kept secrets
of kernel compilation, right up there with "make gconfig". It doesn't
cause problems on these two arches, and it's nicer than cping a buncha
stuff and manually naming it. I'd like to keep it in for x86+amd64.
Thoughts?