From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 2 01:14:51 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79E8C16A4BF for ; Tue, 2 Sep 2003 01:14:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailspool.ops.uunet.co.za (mailspool.ops.uunet.co.za [196.7.0.140]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFC9543F3F for ; Tue, 2 Sep 2003 01:14:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ianf@mci.com) Received: from copernicus.so.cpt1.za.uu.net ([196.30.72.32]) by mailspool.ops.uunet.co.za with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 19u6In-000Ly8-00; Tue, 02 Sep 2003 10:14:13 +0200 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=mci.com) by copernicus.so.cpt1.za.uu.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 19u6Ic-000Gpy-00; Tue, 02 Sep 2003 10:14:02 +0200 To: Sheldon Hearn In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 02 Sep 2003 09:49:02 +0200." <20030902074902.GE7064@starjuice.net> References: <20030902074902.GE7064@starjuice.net> From: Ian Freislich X-image-url: http://www.digs.iafrica.com/gallery/ian-small.gif X-BOFH: true X-LART: Depleted uranium X-No-Junk-Mail: I do not want to get *any* junk mail. You have been deleted Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 10:14:02 +0200 Message-ID: <64725.1062490442@mci.com> Sender: ianf@mci.com cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: /lib symlinks problem? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 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: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 08:14:51 -0000 Sheldon Hearn wrote: > On (2003/09/02 09:43), Ian Freislich wrote: > > > > I posted one approach to this today... touch a file right before you > > > start installworld, then consider anything not newer than that file a > > > candidate for disposal. There is currently something weird going on in > > > /usr/lib though... a lot of the files don't have newer dates, I haven't > > > tracked down why yet. > > > > That's because bsd.lib.mk and bsd.own.mk hardcode '-C' for install. > > Which a few of us have complained about and subsequently settled on > local patches for. :-( Which is what I eventually did too after nearly destroying half of /usr/lib because /usr/src/share/examples/etc/make.conf and make.conf(5) *LIE* about (or at the very least misrepresent) what really happens. The explanation 'these files are dependencies' doesn't really explain the need for install -C to me and just makes it harder to find what was installed and what was stale. I propose the following patch to make.conf(5) and something similar to make.conf: Index: make.conf.5 =================================================================== RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/share/man/man5/make.conf.5,v retrieving revision 1.78 diff -u -d -r1.78 make.conf.5 --- make.conf.5 29 Aug 2003 11:24:53 -0000 1.78 +++ make.conf.5 2 Sep 2003 08:11:10 -0000 @@ -181,11 +181,15 @@ .It Va INSTALL .Pq Vt str the default install command. -To have commands compared before doing +To have targets compared with the source before doing the install, use .Bd -literal -offset indent INSTALL="install -C" .Ed +Note that some system Makefile includes +hardcode options for +the supplied install command. +Your mileage may vary. .It Va LOCAL_DIRS .Pq Vt str List any directories that should be entered when doing