Re: CVS commit: src/etc

[Izumi Tsutsui <tsutsui%ceres.dti.ne.jp@localhost>]

martin@ wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 03:05:16AM +0900, Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
> > Isn't it easier to add "ipty" into MI "all" target (at least for HEAD)?
> 
> Easier maybe, but we do not realy want those device nodes on typical /dev
> filesystems (at least that was my understanding).

- What's the actual benefits on removing those device nodes on /dev?
  Is it more important than possible fallouts in install materials?

- If we are going to remove compat pty nodes completely,
  why don't we also update all install stuff not implicitly
  using those node, i.e. shouldn't we change all install media
  to have mount_ptyfs(8) and explicitly mount /dev/pts in /.profile
  or /etc/rc scripts?

Current situation (fixing only MAKEDEV) seems quite inconsistent for me.

> > We had to fix src/distrib/sparc/miniroot/Makefile.inc recently, and now
> > we might also have to fix src/distrib/common/bootimage/Makefile.bootimage
> > (though it fortunately works since MD MAKEDEV.conf of amd64/i386 have "ipty"
> >  in target "all" and no other ports have installimage).
> 
> I should have used ipty instead of opty. IMHO it is a bug that x86 md_all
> includes it - we should fix that and then, of course, fix Makefile.bootimage -
> it probably should just use "init".

No, Makefile.bootimage is shared by both liveimages and installimages,
so if the "all" target in MI MAKEDEV.conf doesn't handle "all" default
environments including installation stuff, we have to add an extra
variable to switch an arg passed to MAKEDEV script.

If all people claim that's the right thing I can fix it so,
but I don't see particular advantage on it over adding compat ipty
to MI "all" target since we don't have enough man power.
---
Izumi Tsutsui