Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 22:55:23 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-sysinstall@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 202058] bsdinstall - Disable dialog(3) for distfetch/checksum/distextract targets Message-ID: <bug-202058-2920-SwFSSOwF1h@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-202058-2920@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-202058-2920@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D202058 --- Comment #8 from Devin Teske <dteske@FreeBSD.org> --- I still need to make sure that we build upon bapt, emaste, and my own work = thus far with respect to the following (previously mentioned) work: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=3Drevision&revision=3D307802 [bapt+ema= ste] https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=3Drevision&revision=3D306648 [emaste] https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=3Drevision&revision=3D306375 [emaste+d= teske] I had previously suggested that a good solid approach would be to first and foremost follow the approach of bapt with respect to tzsetup, and then optionally add a command-line flag to each of the applications to enable runtime disabling of dialog(1). I do like to think of iterative approaches that build upon and reinforce pr= ior works. The shortcomings of distfetch, distextract, and cksum are also solved by wa= y of fixing the other issue of them not being able to run in a dialog(1,3)-less environment -- regardless of that being a decision that is made at compile-= time or runtime. I think the best approach would be to use isatty(3)/stty(1) at runtime to invoke the same code-path as WITHOUT_DIALOG. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-202058-2920-SwFSSOwF1h>