On 5 Jul, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> If you want to clean out crap left behind by `make world', just do this:
>
> make world
> rm -r /usr/include# Make world really should overwrite
> make installincludes # header files!
> find /bin /sbin /usr/bin /usr/sbin /usr/lib /usr/libexe
At 12:42 PM +0100 7/6/02, Paul Richards wrote:
>On Sat, 2002-07-06 at 03:46, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>> At 3:05 AM +0100 7/6/02, Paul Richards wrote:
>> >Let's start with a premise: No-one running current is using
>> >it for anything other than developing FreeBSD.
>>
>> This is assumption is
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Paul Richards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: A 'sysclean' target would be the same in my mind. If you're "within
: spec" of what -current supports then running that target shouldn't hose
: you. If you're outside spec then you need to take your own precaut
Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> On (2002/07/05 17:24), Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> > You and Paul are both pretty "out there" if you think -current users
> > will graciously accept a new world order in which ports linked
> > dymanically against system libraries won't work between a system upgrade
> > and the ne
On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 12:42:53PM +0100, Paul Richards wrote:
> On Sat, 2002-07-06 at 03:46, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> > At 3:05 AM +0100 7/6/02, Paul Richards wrote:
> > >Let's start with a premise: No-one running current is using
> > >it for anything other than developing FreeBSD.
> >
> > Thi
On (2002/07/05 17:24), Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> You and Paul are both pretty "out there" if you think -current users
> will graciously accept a new world order in which ports linked
> dymanically against system libraries won't work between a system upgrade
> and the next port reinstall.
Sorry abou
On Sat, 2002-07-06 at 13:29, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 05, 2002 at 10:45:41AM +0100, Paul Richards wrote:
> > I think we should add a target to make world that checks for the
> > existence of an old base install of Perl and removes it if it exists.
> >
> > As a general principle, if we
On Fri, Jul 05, 2002 at 10:45:41AM +0100, Paul Richards wrote:
> I think we should add a target to make world that checks for the
> existence of an old base install of Perl and removes it if it exists.
>
> As a general principle, if we do things like remove code during -current
> development then
Paul Richards wrote:
> On Sat, 2002-07-06 at 03:46, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> > At 3:05 AM +0100 7/6/02, Paul Richards wrote:
> > >Let's start with a premise: No-one running current is using
> > >it for anything other than developing FreeBSD.
> >
> > This is assumption is too limiting.
>
> It sh
On Sat, 2002-07-06 at 03:46, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> At 3:05 AM +0100 7/6/02, Paul Richards wrote:
> >Let's start with a premise: No-one running current is using
> >it for anything other than developing FreeBSD.
>
> This is assumption is too limiting.
It shouldn't be. You're trying to defend
Here are two files that make stateful configuration of world
building somewhat easier.
I expect that the way this will be used is to allow Paul, et. al.
the option of setting a default, and having the system ask users
if they want to live with Paul's default, or if they want to
select their own d
On 6 Jul, Paul Richards wrote:
> Let's start with a premise: No-one running current is using it for
> anything other than developing FreeBSD.
>
> Given that premise, then there shouldn't be anything in /usr outside of
> /usr/local, that wasn't put there by make world. Likewise the same
> should
NetBSD has a mtree.obsolete. Seems like that might not be a bad way
to solve this generically.
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
At 3:05 AM +0100 7/6/02, Paul Richards wrote:
>Let's start with a premise: No-one running current is using
>it for anything other than developing FreeBSD.
This is assumption is too limiting.
People running -current are doing it to test the latest builds.
What they *do* to test it is their busine
On Sat, 2002-07-06 at 01:07, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> At 3:33 PM -0700 7/5/02, Terry Lambert wrote:
> >
> >So, to summarize:
> >
>
> Let me summarize my own position.
>
> There are a number of files which installworld does install. After
> an installworld is done, there may be a number of fil
Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> At 3:33 PM -0700 7/5/02, Terry Lambert wrote:
> >So, to summarize:
> >
>
> Let me summarize my own position.
I was summarizing both. It's not really necessary to summarize a
position you've already taken... that's "reiterating". 8-) 8-).
You want a one sentence summ
At 3:33 PM -0700 7/5/02, Terry Lambert wrote:
>
>So, to summarize:
>
Let me summarize my own position.
There are a number of files which installworld does install. After
an installworld is done, there may be a number of files on a person's
hard disk which were not put there by the most recent i
On Fri, Jul 05, 2002 at 03:33:08PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Others: I think the flaw in your idea is that you aren't
> really running -current, so why the heck aren't you just
> running -stable, instead of pretending to run -current?
Of course by this argument, we wouldn't be running -stable
Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> While I agree there should be some automatic way to get rid
> of old cruft (or at least to list it), I do not think that it
> should be part of installworld or installkernel. All that
> any such step can do is find things which "it does not expect"
> to be there, but it
Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> You and Paul are both pretty "out there" if you think -current users
> will graciously accept a new world order in which ports linked
> dymanically against system libraries won't work between a system upgrade
> and the next port reinstall.
>
> If you want to clean out crap
On Fri, Jul 05, 2002 at 11:29:30AM +0100, Mark Murray wrote:
> > I think we should add a target to make world that checks for the
> > existence of an old base install of Perl and removes it if it exists.
>
> I agree that we may need a tool to do this, but I don't agree that it
> gets done automat
At 11:16 AM +0100 7/5/02, Paul Richards wrote:
>On Fri, 2002-07-05 at 10:52, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> > On (2002/07/05 10:45), Paul Richards wrote:
> > > I'd like to resurrect it's original meaning and add code
> > > to clean out old versions of Perl.
> >
> > This would not fit in with the rest
On Fri, 2002-07-05 at 16:24, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> On (2002/07/05 05:22), Terry Lambert wrote:
>
> > > This would not fit in with the rest of the world target, which doesn't
> > > clean out stale headers, stale libraries or stale binaries.
> > > Special-casing certain things will surprise people
On (2002/07/05 05:22), Terry Lambert wrote:
> > This would not fit in with the rest of the world target, which doesn't
> > clean out stale headers, stale libraries or stale binaries.
> > Special-casing certain things will surprise people.
>
> Headers and libraries arguably should be removed, so
> I think we should add a target to make world that checks for the
> existence of an old base install of Perl and removes it if it exists.
I agree that we may need a tool to do this, but I don't agree that it
gets done automatically by "make world".
> As a general principle, if we do things like
25 matches
Mail list logo
