On Monday, 7 October 2002 at 18:46:35 -0700, Steve Kargl wrote: > On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 10:34:42AM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: >> On Monday, 7 October 2002 at 17:44:42 -0700, Steve Kargl wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 09:16:10AM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: >>>> On Monday, 7 October 2002 at 11:20:56 -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: >>>>> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>>> >>>> There are then dozens of ways of finding the old files and removing >>>> them. I'd be inclined just to remove all files in those directories >>>> which are older than some file in the build tree--*after* a successful >>>> installation. >>>> >>>> Thoughts? >>>> >>> >>> What would you do about "install -C"? >> >> I think it confuses the issue rather than solving it. We're talking >> about removing binaries which are no longer needed, not replacing >> binaries that are needed. >> > > I understand what the topic is. I don't understand your comment, "I'd > be inclined just to remove all files in those directories which are older > than some file in the build tree--*after* a successful > installation."
Ah, sorry, that might bear more explanation. > "install -C" doesn't change the timestamp, so you'll have tons of > files that are older than "some file in the build tree". What does the last access timestamp look like after install -C? > You don't blindly want to remove files and I doubt you want > mergemaster to list possibly hundreds of files as removal > candidates. So, yes, "install -C" confuses the issue :-) Indeed. What good reason do we have to use it on these directories? Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
