Re: updating a piece of the running system from build.sh is too hard

[David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 05:20:35PM +0900, Masao Uebayashi wrote:
 > > ISTM (if we're talking about rearranging stuff) that this should be
 > > "install", and the install that goes into $OBJ/destdir.$ARCH/...
 > > should be called something else, like stage-install or install-staging
 > > or whatnot.
 > > 
 > > That is, we may as well admit that (like pkgsrc) we have two
 > > installation trees, one used during the build and one that the
 > > completed build is dropped into later.
 > 
 > Understood, but I'm looking forward more; syspkgs.  If we always
 > create packages from the staged (dest)dir and install them via
 > pkg_install(8), we can concentrate installation path in single
 > point; we use the same method to install NetBSD in sysinst(8), line
 > install, or embedded target image creation.  This is a huge win.

It may be (I remain unconvinced) but it's also completely irrelevant
to what I (and most everybody else) wants to have happen if I go into
src/bin/sh and type 'make && make install'.

If that would require grinding around and installing some whole syspkg
instead of just a new sh, that would be a big big regression. If it
doesn't require that, syspkgs are irrelevant to what I'm talking
about.

 > > Our build system is way too complicated and doesn't need 7/8 of the
 > > combinations it supports.
 > 
 > Fully agreed.  If we could agree that the current design is complicated and
 > should be simplified to improve further, only that we agree, that'd be a BIG
 > one step forward...

I don't think anyone disagrees that it's too complicated. I think in
general most people think it doesn't need all the crap it has, but
there's not so much agreement on which stuff is the crap.

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost