From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 27 05:05:58 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F524106564A for ; Tue, 27 Dec 2011 05:05:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from 172-17-198-245.globalsuite.net (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFFF414F864; Tue, 27 Dec 2011 05:05:57 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4EF95235.7020502@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2011 21:05:57 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Xin LI References: <4EF904F2.4020109@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: undefined OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-current Subject: Re: Removal of sysinstall from HEAD and lack of a post-install configuration tool X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 05:05:58 -0000 On 12/26/2011 20:29, Xin LI wrote: > On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Doug Barton wrote: >> The story so far ... >> >> sysinstall was removed from HEAD in October. I (and others) objected on >> the basis that at this time there is no replacement for the post-install >> configuration role that sysinstall played. More sysinstall components >> were then removed. Then the old version of libdialog (which sysinstall >> used) was removed. Thus at this point it's not possible to easily >> restore sysinstall. >> >> So my question is, how much do you care? Is lack of that functionality >> in HEAD something that we care about? > > Perhaps make it a port instead? I personally don't use sysinstall for > post-install tasks at all, but it won't hurt to have such > functionality. You're not the first person to suggest that, but I don't see how it's actually responsive to the problem. This issue only affects HEAD, so a port would not be generally useful. It would also be an enormous amount of work to make it into a port. It would be much easier to revert the necessary changes to bring back the old libdialog and sysinstall itself. Doug -- [^L] Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/