On Sat, 2002-07-06 at 03:46, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > At 3:05 AM +0100 7/6/02, Paul Richards wrote: > >Let's start with a premise: No-one running current is using > >it for anything other than developing FreeBSD. > > This is assumption is too limiting.
It shouldn't be. You're trying to defend a position that the project doesn't support. The -current branch is for FreeBSD developers, or volunteers brave enough to test the -current branch. As such, don't be surprised if it wipes your hard disk clean. > People running -current are doing it to test the latest builds. > What they *do* to test it is their business. Ie, if I want to > install some port in /usr instead of /usr/local, that is something > I should be able to do. You're free to do that, but you're not really testing -current then, since you're doing things outside the scope of what -current is designed to support. If you're doing stuff to stress it in some way that's particular to you're testing regime then fine, but that's something you'd need to be aware of and it's not that different to installing a personal, more up to date version of gcc in the base, if you do that you need to be aware that the standard current build system will overwrite your changes. A 'sysclean' target would be the same in my mind. If you're "within spec" of what -current supports then running that target shouldn't hose you. If you're outside spec then you need to take your own precautions. I'm not suggesting that 'sysclean' be a default part of installworld anymore. I suggested that removing perl should be, but the debate has moved on from that position and I think the sensible thing now would be to create a 'sysclean' target, that could be run as desired that was more comprehensive than just removing perl or other deprecated apps. A more aggressive cleaning target I think solves more problems more effectively and if it's an optional target I can't see any problems. Probably a make.conf knob, like the update target uses, so people can have it on or off as part of the standard build as they desire. I think having it as a make target is a good thing, since it would allow us to easily document that people who truly want to test current should run that target after a build to ensure they're not running old stuff. It keeps the code tied into the build process too. A separate optional script wouldn't be as well integrated into our build setup. -- Paul Richards | FreeBSD Services Ltd | Order 4.6 on DVD now. http://www.freebsd-services.com | To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message