Re: CVS commit: src/distrib/common/bootimage

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

christos@ wrote:

> On Mar 15,  4:47pm, tsutsui%ceres.dti.ne.jp@localhost (Izumi Tsutsui) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/distrib/common/bootimage
> 
> | Well, "old code eliminations" gives nothing to users.
> 
> You are right, but it makes it cheaper for us to maintain things
> in the long run and improves consistency and robustness.

IMO we should rather focus on marketing than consistency for developers...

> | I would rather like to see a proper migration plan
> | how to eliminate it without regressions, especially on install.
> | (If installation fails we won't get possible new users)
> 
> I don't think that we are going to be getting new users from the
> sun2 or sun3 ports... And even if we do, these are the "expert"
> users who will help us debug the problem.

You should re-read PRs.  There were much more ports that failed on 6.0.

If you changed PTYFS mandatory for sysinst and
you forget to add file-system PTYFS to some installation
kernel config files, the similar failures could happen.

> | In pre-6.0 days compat pty nodes were removed
> | from MAKEDEV all target without annoucement, then
> | a certain number of Tier-II users failed to install
> | on their favorite machines with unclear "openpty() failed"
> | messages during installation.
> | 
> | One possible kludge is adding "file-system PTYFS" into conf/std,
> | but I don't think we can make consensus with it.
> 
> Or go and add it to all the install kernels (as I mentioned before).
> There is no precedence for adding filesystems to conf/std.

In pre-6.0 days, we tried to fix all installation MAKEDEV targets,
but actually it failed.  "It's easier said than done."

---
Izumi Tsutsui