Re: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 09:36:58AM -0600, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
> On 02/28/11 09:20, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Monday, February 28, 2011 9:49:07 am Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
> >> There are some changes to the distribution format involved in this
> >> patch, which are outlined below, and about which I would also appreciate
> >> feedback:
> >> - The src tree is not split up into pieces (e.g. ssbin) as with sysinstall
> > I would at least like to have src split up into two pieces:
> >
> > 1) would be equivalent of sbase and ssys of old distributions, so you could
> > choose to just install kernel sources along with the top-level Makefile bits
> > to build kernels.  I commonly install this subset on production machines so I
> > can install a custom kernel in a pinch.
> >
> > 2) would be everything else in the source tree.
> 
> This is a little bit tricky, since it involves inter-distribution 
> dependencies which don't currently exist (e.g. you need sbase for ssys 
> to be useful, and for severythingelse to be useful). I suppose that the 
> top-level Makefile bits are small and could end up in both archives, 
> where one can overwrite the other with the same thing. Would that solve 
> your problem?
> -Nathan

Why not put the toplevel Makefiles, README and perhaps COPYRIGHT and
MAINTAINERS file into base?  This way there are no inter-dependencies
between src parts, /usr/src will consume only a modest bit of space
in base but documents wat ont would be able to do is sbase/ssys were
installed.

Regards,

Paul Schenkeveld