Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 17:10:28 -0800 From: NGie Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com> To: Garance A Drosehn <drosih@rpi.edu> Cc: Dmitry Morozovsky <marck@rinet.ru>, gad@FreeBSD.org, current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: mtree patch for WITHOUT_LPR Message-ID: <43EEAD5C-5AE9-4704-B3D8-60B19311A773@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <83EBC2D5-D4A1-4D5E-8538-A536C8A8500C@rpi.edu> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1511071404560.6619@woozle.rinet.ru> <83EBC2D5-D4A1-4D5E-8538-A536C8A8500C@rpi.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Nov 8, 2015, at 17:04, Garance A Drosehn <drosih@rpi.edu> wrote: >=20 > On 7 Nov 2015, at 6:08, Dmitry Morozovsky wrote: >>=20 >> as you're still maintaining lpr, I'm passing this through you. >>=20 >> If one build his server WITHOUT_LPR, there are constantly few = directories that >> are created by make hierarchy and then reported my make check-old. >>=20 >> Attached is a small patch against -current that should eliminate it = (inspired >> by BSD.groff.mtree). >>=20 >> Your thoughts? >=20 > Thanks for checking with me. >=20 > While I've done a lot with 'lpr', I have not done much of anything = with > mtree files. >=20 > After having read through the rest of this thread, I have the = impression > that we're no longer interested in a separate mtree subfile for 'lpr'. > Instead we'll go with Brian's observation that: "if a directory is in = the > dist mtrees, it should not be listed as an OLD_DIRS." >=20 > Am I correct in thinking that? With OptionalObsoleteFiles.inc, yes. With ObsoleteFiles.inc, the = directories should still be removed. Thanks! -NGie=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43EEAD5C-5AE9-4704-B3D8-60B19311A773>