On Mon, 06 Jan 2003 at 22:32:42 -0500, Daniel Goepp wrote: > > Lowell Gilbert wrote: > > I don't know why you're talking about cvsup; cvsup is not relevant > > to this; it is a method for downloading files, primarily from cvs > > archives. What you're looking for is changing the base system > > itself; how you get the source code is irrelevant. > > I don't think it is, because you also have to control what source you > download. So in conjunction with only keeping what you use in sync, > you also only compile and install what you use. In fact, it's the > communication between cvs/cvsup and the FreeBSD src build/install that > I'm having problems with.
CVSup has *nothing* to do with an initial install of FreeBSD. Your problem seems to stem from your misunderstanding of how things actually work. The stuff you want is in /usr/src/usr.sbin/sysinstall and has nothing at all to do with CVSup. I'm not trying to flame you here or make you feel stupid, please don't take this message that way. You just seem to have some misconceptions that are leading you in the wrong direction and I'm just trying to point them in a better direction :-) - jim I don't feel flamed, but I should clarify my intentions. I understand completely the separation between the two, this is my problem. My original question is how to unite them, not "are they are separated?" Would this not seem to make sense for many of us to have? I have read that a future version of FreeBSD is going to have a "better" installer, but I'm not sure that is going to solve the problem either, unless it's going to work with the source better. Just having more options on how to install, although nice, would just change where you start, not how you maintain your system over time. Here is what I am proposing: A dynamic installer, that can start at a very basic and bare point, but doesn't have to. For all the folks out there that just want a default install, great...But for those of us who like to actually be in control of our systems, there needs to be more. This installer would not only just install what you selected, but also leave a configuration file, with the options and applications you selected in the install. Now, here is where cvsup needs to step in, and be able to read that file, and only keep the items you have selected synchronized in /usr/src and /usr/ports (/usr/docs too now that I think of it). And then, when you do a make buildworld or make installworld, you only compile and install what you had previous selected. Some folks believe that using the "core" versions of the apps is the best method. However, even the FreeBSD documentation itself conflicts this. OpenSSL is one of the core apps, and that's fine, but yet it's recommended that you install the ports version of OpenSSH, which is also installed by default. What is the actual benefit of an application being considered part of the OS, vs. a local install? I have my own feelings on this, and there appears to be a lot of people on both sides of this one, so I'm not trying to start any debates here. But the line between the two needs to be more clearly defined and decided on. It's a mess to clean some of this up, you do a default install of the openssh port right now, and you now have two copies of it on your system, not an upgraded original. Sorry, I'm going on more than I meant to here. All I'm trying to say is that beginning to end, applications on the server could be controlled better, from what gets installed, to what gets its source synchronized, to what gets compiled. I love BSD, and I'm not digging on the team, they do a great job. But I have met with a great deal of frustration cleaning out applications I don't want at all, upgrading applications I do want, compiling applications I'll never use, etc... So, in closing, if you think there is a way to do what I'm talking about here, I'm all ears. But I don't think it's because of a lack of understanding in how it currently works, but more a desire for it to be more powerful. Peace. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message