David O'Brien wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 09, 2000 at 07:59:46PM -0800, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> > > The only thing you don't like about mtree is it changing ownership +
> > > modes, right?
> > Not only that. Using mtree(1) creates busloads of unnecessary
> > directories.
> But they're harmless. While I agree it is clutter, having to duplicate
> its work in the Makefile's with lists of dirs to create just seems like a
> duplication and waste of effort;
If the list is short (as it is now), there's no real problem, but if
there's a real bootstrapping issue with groff(1) and we need to add 10+
directories, then it will become a more serious issue and I think that a
better solution is called for in that case.
> and even an little NIH as mtree is
> rather ingrained in BSD.
NIH has nothing to do with it. To me it seems that mtree(1) is designed
for a different purpose. Yes, it so happens that mtree can create
directories, but that's not the root purpose of the tool. And yet,
that's the only reason we'll use mtree(1) in the build (at all?).
Adding features to mtree to have it better function in our builds only
adds to the bootstrapping overhead, and all we really want to reuse is
the directory structure information in our BSD.*.dist files. If the
effort to write a small script is of the same order as patching mtree,
then I prefer the small script...
mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tel: (408) 447-4222
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message