Subject: misc/4702: INSTALL comment
To: None <gnats-bugs@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Simon J. Gerraty <sjg@frodo.cdn.telstra.com.au>
List: netbsd-bugs
Date: 12/17/1997 13:29:45
>Number:         4702
>Category:       misc
>Synopsis:       INSTALL mentions a trivial mod that may be needed.
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       non-critical
>Priority:       low
>Responsible:    misc-bug-people (Misc Bug People)
>State:          open
>Class:          doc-bug
>Submitter-Id:   net
>Arrival-Date:   Tue Dec 16 18:35:01 1997
>Last-Modified:
>Originator:     Simon J. Gerraty
>Organization:
>Release:        1.3_BETA
>Environment:
	
>Description:
	
Sorry, to nit pick, but the INSTALL doc says:

"It is worth noting that unless all of the source distribution sets
are installed (except the domestic set), you can't rebuild and install
the system from scratch, straight out of the box.  However, all that is
required to rebuild the system in that case is a trivial modification 
to one Makefile."

While I don't know any unsophisticated NetBSD admins, I know a few
*nix admins who would expect to be able to config and build a new
kernel, but would _not_ know what to do if that failed due to an error
in a Makefile.

I kid you not.  Anyway, such users when presented with the above para
would ask "if its trivial, why don't you tell us what it is".

Of course config(8) is probably the best place to describe the trivial
mod as that is more likely to be read at the time the info is needed. 
Then INSTALL could end that para above with "see config(8) for details."

Like I said, I know its a nit pick, and that sentence has been there
as long as I can recall - but everytime I read it, I think of those
to whom make(1) and Makefiles are black magic.

--sjg

>How-To-Repeat:
	
>Fix:
	
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted: