Re: Removing GENERIC.local from the repository

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

David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost> writes:

> On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 11:31:42AM +0100, Martin Husemann wrote:
>  > > Me too, I think, except furthermore, until we got "no foo", it never
>  > > seemed very useful. Now it is, though.
>  > 
>  > You can view it the other way around too -
>  > now that we can mostly do "no xxx" for arbitrary xxx, it is just as easy to
>  > have your own config file include GENERIC and do some modifications after
>  > that. Which, in my eyes, makes a pretty useless feature like the .local
>  > include even more useless.
>
> Well, it's not quite the same, because the way things are you can put
> custom stuff in .local and make a distribution with install images
> that include said stuff. This is convenient if you want to install a
> weird machine and don't want to wade through src/distrib to figure out
> how to make a custom installer. Of course, you can also just edit
> GENERIC and INSTALL.

Indeed, this is exactly why GENERIC.local was added to be able to modify
all the various GENERIC* kernels at the same time, as well as XEN*_DOM*.
I typically use it to add IPsec and swwdog, which I want to be included
as part of a normal install, but aren't for various (perfectly ok)
reasons.

INSTALL* does not include GENERIC.local; typically I use GENERIC.local
to add things, and that can make INSTALL overflow.

But, I don't mind if GENERIC.local is not checked in and we use
cinclude.  I just want to be able to modify all the GENERIC*/XEN* in a
build easily and cleanly, which is different from building a custom
kernel with a custom name.