From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 24 14:48:22 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2620E16A41F; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 14:48:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from mailout08.sul.t-online.com (mailout08.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 717F043D45; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 14:48:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from fwd18.aul.t-online.de by mailout08.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 1Dwhm7-0001mc-02; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 16:48:19 +0200 Received: from Andro-Beta.Leidinger.net (XKzzJsZYoecwXHsfs2-VbULVc4JZRw5sv2Gd3UyPLyhnfGUxua6LsL@[84.165.220.57]) by fwd18.sul.t-online.de with esmtp id 1Dwhlu-0srFw00; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 16:48:06 +0200 Received: from Magellan.Leidinger.net (Magellan.Leidinger.net [192.168.1.1]) by Andro-Beta.Leidinger.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j6OEm5CP057891; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 16:48:05 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 16:48:04 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger To: Doug Barton Message-ID: <20050724164804.47a029d6@Magellan.Leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <42E2DA50.2000205@FreeBSD.org> References: <200507231942.j6NJgdks037508@repoman.freebsd.org> <42E2A029.1090404@gmail.com> <42E2DA50.2000205@FreeBSD.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 1.9.12 (GTK+ 2.6.8; i386-portbld-freebsd6.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ID: XKzzJsZYoecwXHsfs2-VbULVc4JZRw5sv2Gd3UyPLyhnfGUxua6LsL@t-dialin.net X-TOI-MSGID: df296e55-abf6-4e0a-b311-ad42918efcf2 Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src ObsoleteFiles.inc X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 14:48:22 -0000 On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 17:01:20 -0700 Doug Barton wrote: > Pawel Worach wrote: > > > While you are at it can you add this one too. > > Done. Please note for next time that you need to add a comment indicating > why the file was removed. This can easily be found from the CVS logs. > > BTW, this is exactly why I don't like this mechanism for cleaning stale > files. This list was, as I predicted it would be, quite literally out of > date when it was committed. This is with all due respect to the effort that > went into producing it. It's the methodology that I'm opposed to here. The technical fact behind the "out of date" part is: - I listed those old files which I had on my machine. - I listed those old files which some told me about. - I missed 2-3 files/dirs. - There's a bug: I use shell globs, but this only worked in a previous version, not in the current version of the targets. So far nobody seems to have noticed those files... at least nobody complained. > I much prefer the dynamic method suggested by myself, mezz, and others which > scans the directories and compares the ages of the files to a known value. > This not only has the benefit of not needing a static list to support it, > but it also has the benefit of alerting you to pieces left behind when you > (for example) add a NO_FOO knob to your make.conf file to avoid building > part of the world. I don't object, but whoever wants to do it: good luck, it isn't as easy as it sounds. You have to put a lot of effort into this (sometimes I have more than one ports tree in /usr, I hope the dynamic approach respects this). While I agree that nobody should put "foreign" files into the basesystem: users do it and any dynamic approach would want to remove those files. While "I don't do that(TM)", I would be upset if something would remove my files. With this static approach we have a typical 20/80 situation. With 20% of effort we have a 80% solution (still some things to do by hand, this isn't much effort and we get a shiny feature). For the other 20% of the solution, we need to invest 80% of effort... Now that we got this software engineering example out the door: actually I think the numbers are more like 5/95... Bye, Alexander. -- Where do you think you're going today? http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91 3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7