From owner-freebsd-current Wed Oct 9 22:32:17 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 681CA37B401 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 22:32:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.bsdimp.com [204.144.255.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C32DE43E6A for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 22:32:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from localhost (warner@rover2.village.org [10.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g9A5WEpk089117; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 23:32:14 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2002 23:31:51 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <20021009.233151.62255687.imp@bsdimp.com> To: tlambert2@mindspring.com Cc: drosih@rpi.edu, FreeBSD-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Do we still need portmap(8)? From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <3DA50A3B.6E0521E6@mindspring.com> References: <20021009.220112.82861653.imp@bsdimp.com> <3DA50A3B.6E0521E6@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.2 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message: <3DA50A3B.6E0521E6@mindspring.com> Terry Lambert writes: : "M. Warner Losh" wrote: : > In message: : > Garance A Drosihn writes: : > : I think most of us realize that we need a solution which can be : > : automatically executed as part of every installworld or mergemaster : > : run. The debate is over the most reasonable method of doing that. : > : > My suggestion would work, and would be a viable solution, so far the : > only one presented in this whole silly thread. : : The mtree.obsolete approach is flawed, in that it's a delta : without an anchor: it's all fine and good to delete things, : when you know that it's a delta from/to. It's less fine, if : you don't know where you are coming from. Eh? If it doesn't exist, it won't be deleted. : The other problem with an mtree.obsolete is that it assumes : the the upgrade process completes successfully. This doesn't : mean that it completes without an error in the upgrade process, : it means that the resulting system functions. It would be one of three: delete automatically, move automatically, do nothing. Reasonable to me. : The only safe way to do the delete is as part of a binary : upgrade process (if you can't make it reversible, then make : it so the forward process can't fail). I disagree. That's no more or less safe than any other way. Or let me rephrase, it is no less safe than a make installworld. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message