On Thu, 20 Dec 2007, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> If you just objected to the fact that it created an /etc, based in the
> current contents of /usr/src, rather than whatever the most recent
> build used, that's something that the user asked for, so I don't think
> it's wrong to give it to him. Can we stop trying to be too smart
> here? If the user asks for something, give it to him, and don't be
> obnoxious.

No, I have no objection to that, provided the user did actually ask for
it (by specifying "-s /usr/src" when running etcupdate).  What I object
to is the behaviour when no "-s" option at all is specified: at present
it behaves like "-s /usr/src", and this often gives incorrect results.
To discuss this issue, please go to tech-install.

> However, etcupdate itself isn't any different now than before. If I
> remember right it's the fact that a make in /usr/src/etc is now broken
> that is the problem.

Yes, I see now that the current problem with etc/atf/atf-run.hooks is
worse than the usual problem.  I'll try to fix it to be no worse than
usual.  This is independent of my proposal to make the etcupdate "-s"
option compulsory, and discussion can stay here in current-users.

--apb (Alan Barrett)