On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 01:23:27PM +0100, Renaud Allard wrote: > > > On 11/18/19 10:08 AM, Raimo Niskanen wrote: > > > A configuration parameter could be accomplished through an optional symlink > > /etc/_sysupgrade that the sysadmin can create to point at the installation's > > sysupgrade directory. The sysupgrade script would test -s /etc/_sysupgrade > > and if there is a symlink readlink -f /etc/_sysupgrade to get SETSDIR. > > > > As it was said earlier, this doesn't solve the removal issue. With your > patch, please try "ln -s /home/_sysupgrade / ; sysupgrade". >
This is actually not yet in my patch. I just want to, as a first step towards either of our solutions, patch to have the /home/_sysupgrade literal in only one place in the sysupgrade script, which would facilitate patching the sysupgrade script before calling it, as a poor man's solution. Plus, the script gets cleaner. The symlink suggestion is a future patch. But I think your suggestion to instead specify the parent directory of the _syspatch directory should be sufficient to remedy the removal issue both for your command line suggestion, as for this future patch symlink suggestion. It is a pity nobody else has responded to that prefix suggestion of yours! I think the feature itself is more important than if it is implemented with a command line argument or a symlink. Other than that. What do you or anyone else think about my argument that the location of the system upgrade download directory is an installation configuration that will not change between upgrades and hence it would be nice to not have to remember the command line argument for every future sysupgrade. Best regards -- / Raimo Niskanen, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB
