Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 22 Oct 2014 21:29:18 -0700
From:      "Simon J. Gerraty" <sjg@juniper.net>
To:        Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
Cc:        FreeBSD Arch <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Retiring WITH_INSTALL_AS_USER
Message-ID:  <21044.1414038558@chaos>
In-Reply-To: <96C0B2BE-0621-4162-BBB7-7D34AEAB5FD0@gmail.com>
References:  <96C0B2BE-0621-4162-BBB7-7D34AEAB5FD0@gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:

> I=E2=80=99d like to retire WITH_INSTALL_AS_USER. Brooks=E2=80=99 NO_ROOT =
(which I=E2=80=99m
> also converting to WITHOUT_ROOT) is much better. WITH_INSTALL_AS_USER

Hmm I don't see anything in share/mk for NO_ROOT.
I see some tweaks in src/Makefile.inc1 though.
Is there more somewhere?

> is broken. First, it requites you also define NO_FSCHG. Second, any
> Makefile that overrides the owner and also has to include src.opts.mk
> early to check options fails. It has been broken for some time (even
> before my conversion to src.opts.mk, since bsd.own.mk included earlier

Sorry I hadn't noticed - but I think the only place we seriously
exercise it is in src/include and etc for distrib-dirs.
Losing the ablity to do that would be a problem.

> Comments?

My only concern would be if it somehow depends on top-level build it
won't work for those of us who do that or at least not using
Makefile.inc1

What can I look at to better understand NO_ROOT ?




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?21044.1414038558>