From owner-freebsd-ports  Mon Dec 23 02:27:12 1996
Return-Path: <owner-ports>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id CAA27945
          for ports-outgoing; Mon, 23 Dec 1996 02:27:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de [141.76.1.11])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id CAA27939
          for <ports@freebsd.org>; Mon, 23 Dec 1996 02:27:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sax.sax.de (sax.sax.de [193.175.26.33]) by irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (8.6.12/8.6.12-s1) with ESMTP id LAA24329; Mon, 23 Dec 1996 11:20:54 +0100
Received: (from uucp@localhost) by sax.sax.de (8.6.12/8.6.12-s1) with UUCP id LAA10708; Mon, 23 Dec 1996 11:20:54 +0100
Received: (from j@localhost) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.8.4/8.6.9) id LAA02493; Mon, 23 Dec 1996 11:06:13 +0100 (MET)
From: J Wunsch <j@uriah.heep.sax.de>
Message-Id: <199612231006.LAA02493@uriah.heep.sax.de>
Subject: Re: Need a quick review of some bsd.port.mk changes
To: ports@freebsd.org
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 11:06:13 +0100 (MET)
Cc: imp@village.org
Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch)
In-Reply-To: <11334.851331687@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at "Dec 23, 96 01:01:27 am"
X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669
X-PGP-Fingerprint: DC 47 E6 E4 FF A6 E9 8F  93 21 E0 7D F9 12 D6 4E 
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL17 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

As Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:

> >  .if (${OPSYS} == "NetBSD")
> >  MD5?=			/usr/bin/md5
> > +.elif (${OPSYS} == "OpenBSD")
> > +MD5?=			/bin/md5
> >  .else
> >  MD5?=			/sbin/md5
> 
> Not to condemn these patches in general, but *jesus christ*, can't ANY
> of the 3 BSD OSes agree on where md5 should go? :-( :-(

And, to continue with this, it should IMHO be expressed as:

.if (exists /usr/bin/md5)
MD5?=			/usr/bin/md5
.elif (exists /bin/md5)
MD5?=			/bin/md5
.else
MD5?=			/sbin/md5

...so if we later on decide that we'd better move it to /bin, too, we
don't need to change the bsd.ports.mk again.

> What's our rationale for having it in /sbin again?

The rationale to have it in either /sbin or /bin was IMHO to have it
statically linked and available early in single-user mode.  Probably
the only one who could enlighten us about why /sbin has chosen is Paul
Traina (who's currently away from email AFAIK).

> > +.if (${OPSYS} == "OpenBSD")
> > +FETCH_CMD?=		/usr/bin/ftp
> > +.else
> >  FETCH_CMD?=		/usr/bin/fetch
> > +.endif

.if (exists /usr/bin/fetch)
FETCH_CMD?=		/usr/bin/fetch
.else
FETCH_CMD?=		/usr/bin/ftp
.endif

> > +.if (${OPSYS} == "OpenBSD")
(see above)
> > +EXTRACT_CMD?=	/bin/tar
> > +.else
> >  EXTRACT_CMD?=	/usr/bin/tar
> > +.endif
> 
> Bleah..  See md5 comments. :-(

Our tar is also statically linked, but still resides in /usr/bin
nevertheless.  We apparently don't expect people to use a poorly
designed tool for restoring their filesystems, in case /usr is
gone. :-)

-- 
cheers, J"org

joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)