From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 8 20:16:57 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90C85106564A; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 20:16:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sektie@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pw0-f54.google.com (mail-pw0-f54.google.com [209.85.160.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 534258FC08; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 20:16:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pwi9 with SMTP id 9so2489863pwi.13 for ; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:16:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:received:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=AEzWLefTh3qNVK8fiwyMo05JGj9KFs/mqhPuW5DUGKo=; b=vP4OKqNBqB0tTRF0lOviOyI0i1dB6mqWc3i3xSZJAVflkjlPYy/q3QETiH4dy5Kqrq QtLZQds5berodlUVlYAlm1/HwgxyxfgcybQvaviiZDD6/ILpd2zFho2fnBz2Gcb5EOxh CCUdp1OKqddKDBlv/2DNxqNURlDpZaogUSfNg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=GiV1QafpzK5bvUe3AMzmF1ZG54zXzXeWKDa40AIU87G0u0Ia77n5ZF8qar5upW9qcc XjEDtNcSu+eBvA4N4KamwU5X/x9Y/m+EVw9kpw/YXzu8DSRnC4NaNeQp5Q1KP7xwfLiH bKaEi9mjGIFH7lT5/5NH+nhARANnsgmiqZPiU= MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: sektie@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.255.21 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:16:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <55861270658151@web135.yandex.ru> <86fx36up9e.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20100408155309.42884l21ogy7m7sw@webmail.leidinger.net> <86vdc2t4hs.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20100408163936.137245fp5ycrre0w@webmail.leidinger.net> <4BBDB5BC.3060002@pcbsd.org> <4BBDD0B9.3060902@pcbsd.org> <1270746097.29753.106.camel@localhost.localdomain> Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:16:55 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: aea8d5815711557f Received: by 10.140.248.7 with SMTP id v7mr974898rvh.252.1270757816711; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:16:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: From: Randi Harper To: Garrett Cooper Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 20:21:29 +0000 Cc: Bruce Cran , freebsd-geom@freebsd.org, Alexander Leidinger , Devin Teske , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, "Andrey V. Elsukov" , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag=2DErling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= , Marian Hettwer , Kris Moore Subject: Re: [RFC] Rewriting sade(8) 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: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 20:16:57 -0000 On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Garrett Cooper wrote: > 2. install.cfg is just a hacky / non-style(9) compliant way of > specifying how to do an install. If you could separate out sysinstall > into separate utilities and have each of the pieces execute as shell > commands with predefined variables at install, you'll be lightyears > ahead of where sysinstall is today. What does style(9) have to do with install.cfg? From the header in the man page, style(9) is a "kernel source file style guide". install.cfg is a configuration file. It is not source code. install.cfg isn't as good as it could be, admittedly. Like much of sysinstall, it needs some work, but I wouldn't call it "hacky". It's readable and fairly easy to understand. What you're talking about doing is rewriting all of sysinstall. How many people have said at some point "I'm going to rewrite sysinstall" or "I'm going to write a replacement for sysinstall"? How many of those people were successful? We're working on a plan and tackling one problem at a time, keeping goals manageable. As a result, sysinstall is getting more TLC now than it has in a very long time. > 3. sysinstall(8) does a lot of crud that it shouldn't do for all > systems. Powerusers won't use sysinstall because does too much crap; > all of the items that sysinstall does behind the scenes to get a > working system should be properly documented in a doc article. I consider myself a poweruser, and I've stuck to using sysinstall. I just select 'custom'. I know a lot of other powerusers - people that have been sysadmins for a very long time - that also use sysinstall. Please don't presume to speak for sysadmins everywhere. I'm not sure what "crud" you're talking about in specific. There's some things I'd like to see go away (some of the post-install configuration bits, how the ports tree is installed). There will be an epic discussion soon of where we'd all like to see sysinstall go ("away" is not the answer I'm looking for :D), but this is going off topic of the original thread. There's a lot of work being done to sysinstall right now by a number of people. I don't want to further complicate things by pushing what you're suggesting into the mix. What we're discussing at the moment is sade/sysinstall specific and affects what happens in the immediate future, not a laundry list of "this is why sysinstall sucks". File a PR. Submit patches. -- randi