Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 18:49:28 +0000 From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: make.conf Message-ID: <199808281849.SAA06317@dingo.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 28 Aug 1998 18:45:10 MST." <23439.904355110@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Just out of curiosity, given that /etc/make.conf is an entirely "local" > > (ie. site-specific) file, if you want to localise such that all your > > I think the issue is that it's not "entirely local" anymore, just as > /etc/rc.conf isn't entirely local since you want to periodically merge > it with the latest versions in order to get all the same hooks and > customization knobs that everyone else is using. In that scenario, > you don't want to touch /etc/make.conf and /etc/rc.conf at all, you > want to update them as part of your system upgrade procedure and only > override the variables you're specifically interested in customizing. You're right; I should have said "is meant to be entirely local". As Matt pointed out, we're not using it like it's "meant" to be used. > The fact that we handle this badly during upgrades is what's probably > leading to a lot of features like Matt's. If we did a better job of > keeping /etc up to date while preserving the various localizations, > it wouldn't be an issue. But we don't. :( Agreed. It's not *impossibly* hard to merge at least some of this stuff; both rc.conf and make.conf are reasonably straightforward. Don't we have any aspiring Perl5 or Tcl weenies out there that would like to make their mark? 8) -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199808281849.SAA06317>