From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 23 19:31:22 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02C4916A4CE for ; Tue, 23 Nov 2004 19:31:22 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mtiwmhc12.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc12.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.116]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4672243D1F for ; Tue, 23 Nov 2004 19:31:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jayobrien@worldnet.att.net) Received: from [192.168.1.6] (dsl093-180-184.sac1.dsl.speakeasy.net[66.93.180.184]) by worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc12) with ESMTP id <2004112319311111200mhc5ge> (Authid: jayobrien@att.net); Tue, 23 Nov 2004 19:31:12 +0000 Message-ID: <41A38FFC.60802@att.net> Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:31:08 -0800 From: Jay O'Brien User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040803 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FreeBSD - questions References: <41A2AA84.1070400@att.net> <41A37D8E.3090107@daleco.biz> In-Reply-To: <41A37D8E.3090107@daleco.biz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Sysinstall - why two different programs in 5.3 RELEASE? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 19:31:22 -0000 Kevin, Thanks for adding the historical view to the answer. Wow. All I wanted to do was learn enough about FreeBSD to run a web server and host mailing lists. Instead, I find myself immersed in an interesting and challenging new culture with knowledgeable mentors. Unfortunately, given my engineering background (I retired in 1985), I have to know "why"; I'm not satisfied with "just do it and don't ask". As a result, this isn't going to be as simple as I thought! Regards, Jay Kevin D. Kinsey, DaleCo, S.P. wrote: > Jay O'Brien wrote: > > >>Why are there two versions of sysinstall, one five times the >>size of the other, and what are the differences between them >>other than file size and time? >> >>Jay O'Brien >>Rio Linda, California, USA >> >> > > > Sorry I'm late on this ... you've got a good technical > answer already; I thought maybe I could add more > detail; there is, apparently, a more or less historical > reason, as well as the practical one. The practical > one: it's a Good Thing(tm) to have sysinstall(8) in > /stand/ (on the root partition) where you can get at it > in the event /usr is unavailable. Indeed, it pretty > much *has* to be under / to install the system.... > > History wise, sysinstall started out 10 years ago > in /sbin. Looks as if Poul-Henning-Kamp and either > Bill Paul (or Paul Traina?) did the work. From the > oldest dusty attic: > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sbin/sysinstall/Attic/ > > Then, for 2.0, Jordan Hubbard "birthed the monster" > that, I guess, is still sysinstall today ... although it's > morphed so many times, it's probably not recognizable > as the same beast any longer[?] {Basically, how could I > know, as a relative newb with Neandertal C skills?} > For a long time afterwards, sysinstall lived in > /usr/src/release: > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/release/sysinstall/Attic/ > > Both of these sysinstalls, near as I can tell, built their > binary(ies) into /stand/, but nowhere else. > > Now, sysinstall doesn't inhabit "userland", per se. > AFAIK /usr/src/release doesn't get rebuilt during > a "make world" cycle; furthermore, though slightly > less relevant, /stand/ isn't in $PATH --- if you try > "whereis sysinstall" on a 4.X box: > > #whereis sysinstall > sysinstall: /usr/share/man/man8/sysinstall.8.gz > > Perhaps I'm reading history wrongly, but it seems the > Project wanted to DTRT and make sure that if an > updated manpage was installed for sysinstall, the > updated binary was, also. To have the manpage > say something the binary can't/won't do violates > the POLA, something the Project is exceptionally > loath to do in almost every situation .... > > So, the bikeshed got painted again: sysinstall > was moved to /usr/sbin, where it would be > rebuilt when the system was updated. Prior to > that time (Jan. 2001), you had to go to > /usr/src/release/sysinstall and "make all install" to > update the binary under /stand/ --- leading to a > situation where you might have, say, 4.2 installed, > but have a sysinstall binary left over from 3.0 or > something, and it wasn't very useful. Furthermore, > you can still have a similar situation in 4.X, because > the change was never MFC'd to -STABLE, and therefore > hasn't appeared until 5.X; (Hmm, will this become a FAQ?) > Note I didn't say "same problem", but "same situation"; > I don't personally know if any additional work on > sysinstall during the 4.X's reign as production > release would have rendered an older version > obsolete or not. I'm tempted to say it hasn't much, > because the "libh" project was supposed to complete > reimplement the installer, and I think the old > monster had been more/less left to hide in his > cave and blow smoke at passers-by (complaining > about the installer *IS* a FAQ).... > > You can find the discussion about the change at: > > http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/archive/2001/freebsd-current/20010114.freebsd-current.html > > The second "sysinstall" thread ("sysinstall.8 breaking buildworld") kind > of shows how it got hashed out amongst the committers, and has some > other factoids that I found educational. I hope my penchant for historical > digression hasn't annoyed you, and welcome corrections to what I've > presented as facts (though we needn't be pedantic, IMHO) > > Kevin Kinsey