Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation

[Matthew Mondor <mm_lists%pulsar-zone.net@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR bin/37415; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Matthew Mondor <mm_lists%pulsar-zone.net@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc: 
Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 00:42:38 -0500

 On Sun,  4 Mar 2012 20:20:04 +0000 (UTC)
 David Laight <david%l8s.co.uk@localhost> wrote:
 
 > The following reply was made to PR bin/37415; it has been noted by GNATS.
 > 
 > From: David Laight <david%l8s.co.uk@localhost>
 > To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
 > Cc: 
 > Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
 > Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 20:13:06 +0000
 > 
 >  On Sun, Mar 04, 2012 at 06:25:02PM +0000, Matthew Mondor wrote:
 >  > The following reply was made to PR bin/37415; it has been noted by GNATS.
 >  >  
 >  >  So far there just were two different menu paths: one for update and
 >  >  another for install.  Is that a problematic approach?
 >  
 >  I'm not 100% sure there is much difference between 'update' and
 >  doing an overlay 'install'.
 >  I always used 'install' - not sure I played much with 'update'.
 
 I myself have no experience with it, updating from source and then
 install=/ over nfs for other systems.
 
 Probably that one difference would be avoiding to extract etc.tgz, and
 running etcupdate+postinstall?
 
 In this context, it could also avoid to rewrite fstab, network and
 hostname configuration...
 -- 
 Matt