Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 10:28:20 -0600
From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
To: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>
Cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: install on {Net,Open}BSD vs install on FreeBSD
Message-ID: <199609241628.KAA06509@rover.village.org>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 24 Sep 1996 10:14:20 MDT." <199609241614.KAA07100@rocky.mt.sri.com>
References: <199609241614.KAA07100@rocky.mt.sri.com> <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 <199609241614.KAA07100@rocky.mt.sri.com> Nate Williams writes: : And they can use gnu-install from ports. No they can't. gnu install isn't in the ports tree. : > 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. Bison is in /usr/src/contrib now. It is needed to build the tree. However, your point is valid that generally the external programs are generally ports. This doesn't argue for install -d, just that you need to pick better examples :-). : > 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. :) Heck, generally most of the gnu tools are just a ./configure ; make on FreeBSD. For a port like that, it is about 10 lines in a Makefile :-). Like I said before, if all I wanted was the functionality, I'd just build the NetBSD install program, install it and be done with it. : > While it does encourage a mildly bad programming habit, NetBSD does : > include it. : : Because for a *very* long time they never used mtree. They still don't use mtree in the build process, as far as I can tell. At least the pica NetBSD port and the arc OpenBSD port don't have an mtree file for them at all.... I understand Nate's view. Any other comments from others? Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199609241628.KAA06509>