From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jun 22 15:11:50 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 7B8C316A4CE
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:11:50 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mid-1.inet.it (mid-1.inet.it [213.92.5.18])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7320543D41
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:11:49 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from andrea@acampi.inet.it)
Received: from acampi.inet.it [::ffff:213.92.1.165] by mid-1.inet.it via
	I-SMTP-5.1.7-516
	id ::ffff:213.92.1.165+qrYAwrmag0Na; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 17:11:31 +0200
Received: by acampi.inet.it (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 9F29E15594; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 17:11:28 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 17:11:28 +0200
From: Andrea Campi <andrea+freebsd_current@webcom.it>
To: current@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20040622151128.GA82977@webcom.it>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i
Subject: Is NO_YP_LIBC working?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:11:50 -0000

Hi,

in the process of setting up a nanobsd-based system I've stumbled on so
many issues during a make buildworld that I've started wondering whether
NO_YP_LIBC is meant to work. Is anybody using it, and do you need local
changes?

Another question is what should it actually do. Parts of librpcsvc and
libwrap call yp_*, as do libexec/{mknetid,ypxfr); it doesn't make sense
to not compile YP support in libc but try (and fail) to compile these.
Maybe we should have a single variable (NOYP or NO_YP, I don't care)
that turns off all YP-only code.

This is the way I'm pursuing locally; I've been slowly fixing issues
as they come up (my buildworld machine is slow), I can post the
resulting diffs as a starting point in case anybody cares.

Bye,
	Andrea

-- 
                   It's not a bug, it's tradition!