Re: RFC: automated way of removing old base system files (only for a recent 6-current!)

In message: <20041024124805.378e6bc3_at_Magellan.Leidinger.net>
            Alexander Leidinger <Alexander_at_Leidinger.net> writes:
: On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:45:58 -0600 (MDT)
: "M. Warner Losh" <imp_at_bsdimp.com> wrote:
: 
: > This looks interesting.  However, it may make more sense to use mtree
: > to delete this, like NetBSD does.
: 
: But mtree doesn't has an option to ask the user if he really wants to
: delete those files (at least it's not very obvious if you fast-read the
: man-page). Even if they are old base system files, I don't want to just
: remove them without explicit permission. Better safe than sorry. But
: maybe I'm paranoid (at least for files and directories, but I strongly
: discourage the automated removal of old libs).

Either you want things clean or you don't :-).  Old libraries almost
certainly should always be removed as well, because should always be
using the compat* port versions of these libraries.  When a library
goes stale, it moves to a different directory.

: If there's consensus that we should use mtree to remove the files and
: directories I will switch to mtree (so far you're the only one who
: responded to this, so it would be nice of someone else would tell us his
: prefered color too), but you have to write a lot more to convince me to
: do the same for the libraries.

The old, stale libraries may well be obsolete from a compat point of
view as well as a security hole point of view.  The libraries are the
FIRST thing that I tend to purge from my systems.  It has been my
experience that stale libraries cause more problems than just about
any other binary in the tree.  I can think of only two other cases
where I've been burned: /usr/include/g++ and some odd thing with
chown.

We can easily have two mtree files if that's a real problem.

The reason I suggested mtree, is that NetBSD has been using
mtree.obsolete for years to automatically delete files.  No one over
there has complained about that feature in all the time I've been
reading NetBSD's mailing lists.

Hmmm, looking at NetBSD's sources right now shows just lists of
obsolete files, segregated by installation set and platform.  At the
very least it shouldn't be MAKEFILE variables.

Warner