Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 24 Sep 1996 10:14:20 -0600 (MDT)
From:      Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>
To:        Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
Cc:        Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: install on {Net,Open}BSD vs install on FreeBSD 
Message-ID:  <199609241614.KAA07100@rocky.mt.sri.com>
In-Reply-To: <199609241607.KAA06394@rover.village.org>
References:  <199609241537.JAA06948@rocky.mt.sri.com> <199609241512.JAA06843@rocky.mt.sri.com> <199609230506.PAA05354@godzilla.zeta.org.au> <199609241441.IAA05913@rover.village.org> <199609241530.JAA06226@rover.village.org> <199609241607.KAA06394@rover.village.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> In message <199609241537.JAA06948@rocky.mt.sri.com> Nate Williams writes:
> : Since the FreeBSD source tree has no need for it (we have a good
> : solution), and the functionality is available for folks that need it in
> : our 'provided' sources (GNU-install), then there is no need to 'pollute'
> : our tree with software that encourages bad practice.
> 
> Generally you are correct, but specifically you aren't.  Sure there
> are better ways of doing this.  However, other widely installed
> systems have this stuff in place.

And they can use gnu-install from ports.

> Other software is using this, good
> bad or ugly.  Other software is using gets, and it is still around.  I
> find the "it could be abused" arguement weak at best.  rm -rf can be
> abused, but it has its uses and its place.

Other software use bison, so we provided bison 'AS A PORT'.  Other
software required GNU-make, so we provide it 'AS A PORT'.  The
functionality exists for 'external' programs to easily get the
functionality they need via 'externally' added programs.

> Taken to an extreme, I'm sure there are many programs whose existance
> is questionable at best.  Do we really need chat, talk and write?

They are programs supplied by CSRG.  It was decided long ago that
FreeBSD would attempt to provide all of the sources CSRG provided
(although with the removal of some of the games that changed recently).

You can always *make* a case for addition/removal of programs.  But, you
haven't convinced me that FreeBSD needs to add potentially bogus
functionality that is doesn't use when said functionality already exists
in an easy to get manner.

> Maybe I'm blind.  I can't find gnu install anywhere in the system or
> in the ports.

It used to be in ports, but if it's not ask Chuck Robey about it.  He
builds ports like a maniac. :)

> While it does encourage a mildly bad programming habit, NetBSD does
> include it.

Because for a *very* long time they never used mtree.

> It is a needless difference between the two systems and
> should be corrected, imho.

IMHO, mistakes made by one person shouldn't be repeated.  "If all your
friends jumped off a bridge....."



Nate



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199609241614.KAA07100>