> >> > just wanted to ask what the current situation on WITHOUT_SYSINSTALL is? it > >> > seems the option gets completely ignored after a recent commit. I thought that Alex was going to follow up on this (cf. http://markmail.org/message/bkbygrx5z5ascukh ) with Warner. > >> > should src.conf be adjusted to mention that WITHOUT_SYSINSTALL == noop or > >> > should the option be completely removed? Please, no. Just turn the bits of it that were disabled back on, and finish implementing it, as the two of you suggested earlier. Especially since the default installer may be changed, and most people may not need or want it. > >> > > >> > also in usr.sbin/Makefile, the sysinstall entry should be moved upwards to the > >> > other non-optional build directories imo. > >> > >> The build didn't even really function when specifying > >> WITHOUT_SYSINSTALL before Nate's recent commits -- so why worry about > >> the state of things? > > > > due to inconsistency? src.conf says WITHOUT_SYSINSTALL will not build > > sysinstall(1). that's obviously wrong. > > I think this context was forgotten: > http://markmail.org/message/fk2xqlrtvljjo3rf Yes, please preserve the context next time. > Also: > > $ find /usr/src/ -name 'Makefile*' | xargs grep WITHOUT_SYSINSTALL > $ echo $? > 1 > $ svn info /usr/src/ | grep Revision | sed 's,Revision: ,,' > 219120 > > Doesn't look like this sentinel is honored anywhere. ? bsd.own.mk, where it's transformed into a MK_SYSINSTALL value that is referenced elsewhere, although not everywhere it should be. But you know this already, as shown in your previous patches! b.Received on Fri Mar 11 2011 - 00:43:01 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:12 UTC