Re: Is there a header conflict?

Riccardo Torrini wrote:
> > If you have /usr/include/machine/_types.h, then:
> >       rm /usr/include/machine/types.h
> 
> Ok, now is removed.  But I think would be a "make installworld" job.

How about "make deinstalloldworld"?


> Anyway, from time to time, I remove /usr/include and do a make includes
> but what happens if I forgot to make "order" ?  Same problem with old
> libraries (my system comes from Febrary 20, 1999, always upgraded).
> How can I safetly remove unused stuff?

People complain about this all the time.

Then someone volunteers to automate it.

Then people complain about it deleting things they don't want
deleted, because maybe they are "dual-boot", and only run 5.x
for developement, and stick with 4.x when using FreeBSD as a
platform, instead of as an ends in itself.

Then I point out that if everything were registed as a package,
you could just deinstall the old package, and install the new
one, and be done with it.  8-).

This is promptly ignored in favor if argueing about whether
"make installworld" or "make updateincludes" or some other
syntactic sugar should be added to the install process, so
that "install means delete".  Then people complain about this
being a 31st step in a process that already takes 30 steps.

Someone says "it's already documented in UPDATING, if you run it
through rot13, and read it upside down, with a particular idea
already in your mind".

Someone says "mtree is the tool for the job!", ignoring the fact
that there is no mtree list of stale files out there.

Someone else says "mergemaster should do this for you".

Then there is a long mailing list discussion about why "it's a
bad idea" and "it's a good idea" "is not!" "is too!" "IS NOT!"
"IS TOO!"  "NOT!" "TOO!" "NOT NOT NOT!" "NA NA NA NA, I CAN'T
HEAR YOU, I HAVE MY FINGERS IN MY EARS!".

Then nothing changes, because everyone who could make the change
is pissed off at everyone who could ask to have their commit bit
taken away if they make the change, and so they all sit around
and glower at each other for a week, after which they all bury
their new grudges in their secret hearts, and it's back to doing
"business as usual".

And if it ever comes down to a 50/50 decision on some new business,
they might bring out the old grudge, dust it off, and vote against
the other person's position "on general principles".

We really do have this down to a science.

So why don't we just avoid the firestorm completely, and say "do
the delete manually, or reinstall when going to a new release",
and go back to sleep with no new grudges?

Followups to -chat.

-- Terry