If memory serves me right, "Crist J. Clark" wrote:
> I had some buildworld failures earlier this week. In
> src/share/man/man8 the Makefile includes code to get the sysinstall.8
> manpage. Since the manpage lives in src/release, this requires that
> you CVSup src-release. I had not been. This broke buildworld which had
> worked in the past. sysinstall.8 is the only file in src-release that
> is required for a buildworld. It seems somewhat silly to me that you
> are required to grab the whole thing for that one file.
OK...I was one of the people who (indirectly) pushed for this. In a
nutshell, I (and, independently, several other people) noticed that the
sysinstall(8) manpage never gets installed as a part of the binary
distributions or by an installworld. (I got highly confused by this
while rewriting some other parts of the documentation.) The solution
was to make sure that an installworld installs this manpage.
> I made the change to the Makefile which makes sysinstall.8 and
> src-release optional. I included it in a reply to the PR that
> precipitated the change,
>
> http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=19818
My personal opinion is that sysinstall.8 is a part of the base system
and shouldn't be optional. If we take your suggestion, it means that
installworld will sometimes install this manpage and sometimes it won't.
A good counter-argument is that installworld doesn't touch
/stand/sysinstall, and therefore shouldn't touch the manpage either.
Idea: Maybe we need the release building process to do this instead?
On all of my systems, the sysinstall binary came from a CD, and never
got touched by any subsequent installworlds.
> Anyone have a good reason why everyone _must_ have src-release to
> buildworld?
I never thought of trying to do a buildworld with anything less than
src-all. I guess my counter question is: Anyone have a good reason to
do buildworlds *without* /usr/src/release/?
Bruce.
PGP signature
