Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 11:34:12 +0100 From: Thierry.Herbelot@alcatel.fr To: Brad Knowles <blk@skynet.be> Cc: FreeBSD-STABLE Mailing List <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: cd /usr/src; make update? Message-ID: <C125689C.003A110B.00@frmta003.netfr.alcatel.fr>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello,
I have at home two cvsupfiles :
one for the core or source, coming from a fast US cvsup server,
one for just the crypto files, coming fro the internat cvsup server.
This way, I'm completely legal (perhaps not according to french regulations ?) and I've got a full repository.
I agree with you that the need for 2 cvsup files is a bit of a hack
TfH
Brad Knowles <blk@skynet.be> on 08/03/2000 11:15:18
To: FreeBSD-STABLE Mailing List
<freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
cc: (bcc: Thierry HERBELOT/FR/ALCATEL)
Subject: cd /usr/src; make update?
Folks,
This doesn't seem to be working quite as easily as I would have hoped.
If you're not in North America, you can't get your crypto sources
from one of the US or Canadian mirrors, and I'd be willing to bet
that the international mirrors don't even have the crypto stuff --
this is why you have to go to cvsup.internat.freebsd.org for
International crypto sources.
However, there appears to be just the one supfile that controls
the configuration for all of /src -- by default, that would be
/usr/src/share/examples/cvsup/stable-supfile, while the crypto stuff
should come from /usr/src/share/examples/cvsup/secure-stable-supfile.
Unfortunately, it doesn't appear possible to specify two
different cvsup hosts in a supfile, so you can't just concatenate
these two supfiles together (making the appropriate changes for the
cvsup hosts for the different packages), so that you could actually
have a reasonable expectation that "cd /usr/src; make update" would
actually work and update *everything* in /usr/src, the crypto stuff
included.
Am I missing something here? Should I not be using "make update"
at all, but instead be calling the appropriate cvsup commands with
the appropriate supfiles directly? If so, then why does "make
update" exist at all?
And if we're going to continue to use "make update", what would
it take to get the default supfiles changed from something under
/usr/src to be something under /etc, so that they don't get wiped out
every time you do a "make update", thus requiring that you go back in
and re-edit them to specify the appropriate cvsup hosts, etc....
Heck, while we're at it, why not have three (or more) variables
in /etc/make.conf that specify the default cvsup hosts for the ports
subsystem, /usr/src, and the crypto stuff, so that we can combine
these with standard templates that are missing only things like the
cvsup host definitions?
BTW, if this is something that would more appropriately be
discussed on the -current mailing list for future releases, please
let me know.
Thanks!
--
These are my opinions and should not be taken as official Skynet policy
=========================================================================
Brad Knowles, <blk@skynet.be> Sys. Arch., Mail/News/FTP/Proxy Admin
Note: No Microsoft programs were used in the creation or distribution of
this message. If you are using a Microsoft program to view this message,
be forewarned that I am not responsible for any harm you may encounter as
a result.
See <http://i-want-a-website.com/about-microsoft/twelve-step.html>; for
details.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?C125689C.003A110B.00>