Re: CVS commit: src/external/gpl3

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

Kamil Rytarowski <n54%gmx.com@localhost> writes:

> On 26.03.2020 15:01, Martin Husemann wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 02:57:40PM +0100, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>>> The build of tools could be fixed independently.
>> The problem is that we build the whole system with the tools gcc, and that
>> gcc misbehaves (or so I understood).
>> 
>> So pointing TMPDIR anywhere does not help.
>> 
>
> Right. Addressing tools build independently (honoring TMPDIR?) and
> defining TMPDIR in /etc shell profile for common use inside the
> distribution.

It seem really obvious to me, and obvious that it is netbsd consensus,
that a tool that needs tmp (without needing persistence) should default
to /tmp.  So I think it's unreasonable to follow upstream here, and
unreasonable to ask everybody to either inherit some system profile or
adjust their own to make tmp files be put in /tmp.

Certainly if something in the tools build doesn't honor TMPDIR, that's a
bug to be fixed -- but that seems uncontroversial.


People who really want gcc tmp files to be put in /var/tmp can set
TMPDIR.  As I understand it people that actually want that are a
minority, and we haven't had a single person express that they want it
during this discussion.

What is the real problem here?  I think it's great that NetBSD-specific
fixes are being upstreamed, and that we are reducing gratuitous changes
from upstream.  But upstream's position that the default tmp should be
/var/tmp is at odds with our and traditional norms, and really seems to
just not make sense.  (Perhaps it does make sense on typical Linux, and
perhaps upstream should have OS-specific tmp defaults.)   Adding
complexity to NetBSD config files and users for the sake of reducing a
diff seems like a bad tradeoff.