On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, David Young wrote:
> > Are there any plans in the works such that "make release" with
> > things like MKKERBEROS=no in /etc/mk.conf will actually work?
> 
> I think than answer is "No."

I think that that would require a rewrite of the way flists are
generated and checked.  Perhaps even stop relying on flists, and have
the build process annotate the METALOG with information about which
syspkg each file belongs to.

> I thought that flist was already created as in (2), below?
>
> > 2. flist should really consist of several sub-flists which are
> > concatenated after "make build" is done, consistent with any
> > conditionals in /etc/mk.conf.  Similarly, any checkflist done
> > against the base flist will fail; any checkflist done agains any of
> > the sub-flists (conditional) will only issue a warning but not fail
> > the build.

Sort of.  Well, there are various sub-flists for machine dependent,
arch-dependent and MI parts, but there are not separate sub-flists that
depend on MKMAN/MKKERBEROS/MKFOO.

--apb (Alan Barrett)