Re: Installer import into HEAD

[Dave Hayes <dave@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Simon Schubert <Simon> writes:
> This indicates that we don't want to change a lot in the installer?  Fair 
> enough.

Well, it's more of "the installer we use should be built by our build
system". Also I'm supporting this for myself at the moment, I found a
bug somewhere back there in the time stream, and it would be nice to
commit a bug fix. 

>> /usr/src/usr.sbin/dfiube_installer
>> /usr/src/usr.sbin/dfiube_curses
>> /usr/src/lib/libaura
>> /usr/src/lib/libdfui
>> /usr/src/lib/libinstaller
> I wouldn't scatter everything around in the source tree.  

I thought about that. My intent was to follow the pattern that sendmail
(and other contrib) currently has in the source tree.

Personally I care not where they actually go, and I do care that I don't
create some off the wall structure that doesn't go against or orthogonal
to the logic that the current structure has.

Can I use BSD.subdir.mk and just move these guys into a subdirectory
without changing the above Makefiles (modulo pathnames with ..)?

> Of course we should move to an installer written in a scripted language, 
> but that's not on the agenda for now :)

I'd love to work on this someday too. However, I doubt we can get a
consensus on which language to use. ;)
-- 
Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - dave@jetcafe.org 
>>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<<

One of the most common defenses against really learning something is
to believe that one knows it already.