cvs commit: src ObsoleteFiles.inc

[Alexander Leidinger]

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 17:01:20 -0700
Doug Barton <dougb at FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> Pawel Worach wrote:
> 
> > While you are at it can you add this one too.
> 
> Done. Please note for next time that you need to add a comment indicating 
> why the file was removed. This can easily be found from the CVS logs.
> 
> BTW, this is exactly why I don't like this mechanism for cleaning stale 
> files. This list was, as I predicted it would be, quite literally out of 
> date when it was committed. This is with all due respect to the effort that 
> went into producing it. It's the methodology that I'm opposed to here.

The technical fact behind the "out of date" part is:
 - I listed those old files which I had on my machine.
 - I listed those old files which some told me about.
 - I missed 2-3 files/dirs.
 - There's a bug: I use shell globs, but this only worked in a previous
   version, not in the current version of the targets. So far nobody seems
   to have noticed those files... at least nobody complained.

> I much prefer the dynamic method suggested by myself, mezz, and others which 
> scans the directories and compares the ages of the files to a known value. 
> This not only has the benefit of not needing a static list to support it, 
> but it also has the benefit of alerting you to pieces left behind when you 
> (for example) add a NO_FOO knob to your make.conf file to avoid building 
> part of the world.

I don't object, but whoever wants to do it: good luck, it isn't as easy
as it sounds. You have to put a lot of effort into this (sometimes I
have more than one ports tree in /usr, I hope the dynamic approach
respects this).

While I agree that nobody should put "foreign" files into the
basesystem: users do it and any dynamic approach would want to remove
those files. While "I don't do that(TM)", I would be upset if something
would remove my files.

With this static approach we have a typical 20/80 situation. With 20%
of effort we have a 80% solution (still some things to do by hand, this
isn't much effort and we get a shiny feature). For the other 20% of the
solution, we need to invest 80% of effort... Now that we got this
software engineering example out the door: actually I think the numbers
are more like 5/95...

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
                Where do you think you're going today?

http://www.Leidinger.net                       Alexander @ Leidinger.net
  GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91  3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7