Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

Nathan Whitehorn nwhitehorn at
Wed Mar 2 15:37:05 UTC 2011

On 02/28/11 09:20, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Monday, February 28, 2011 9:49:07 am Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
>> BSDinstall has acquired at this point its final form (prior to a future
>> merge with pc-sysinstall), and I believe is ready to replace sysinstall
>> on the 9.0 snapshot ISOs. Barring any objections, I would like to pull
>> this switch 2 weeks from today, on the 14th of March.
>> A patch to the release infrastructure code can be found here (make
>> release must be run with Makefile.bsdinstall using this patch to get
>> non-sysinstall media):
> Hmm, does your installed world include the pre-built mergemaster database?
> That should really be preserved.
> It happens here in the old release Makefile:
> # Install the system into the various distributions.
> release.2:
>          cd ${.CURDIR}/..&&  ${CROSSMAKE} distrib-dirs DESTDIR=${RD}/trees/base
>          cd ${.CURDIR}/..&&  ${CROSSMAKE} ${WORLD_FLAGS} distributeworld \
>              DISTDIR=${RD}/trees
>          sh ${.CURDIR}/scripts/ -F "${CROSSENV}" -D
> "${RD}/trees/base"
>          touch ${.TARGET}
> I use a one-line patch locally to bootstrap etcupdate into the worlds I
> package up at work via a similar one-liner.

And this is why sending out patches for review is a good idea. I've 
updated my code to call into this script, though it would be nice if, 
say, make distribution handled this. Thanks for pointing it out.

>> Test ISOs for amd64 and i386 can be found here:
>> More recent test ISOs, as well as ones for other architectures, may be
>> available at:
>> Bug reports would be very appreciated at this time. There are three
>> known bugs currently, which will be fixed soon, so please don't report
>> these: error reporting is not graceful if there are no writable disks in
>> the system, you must select at least one optional component, and the doc
>> build is not currently connected to the releases.
>> There are some changes to the distribution format involved in this
>> patch, which are outlined below, and about which I would also appreciate
>> feedback:
>> - The src tree is not split up into pieces (e.g. ssbin) as with sysinstall
> I would at least like to have src split up into two pieces:
> 1) would be equivalent of sbase and ssys of old distributions, so you could
> choose to just install kernel sources along with the top-level Makefile bits
> to build kernels.  I commonly install this subset on production machines so I
> can install a custom kernel in a pinch.
> 2) would be everything else in the source tree.

This is a little bit tricky, since it involves inter-distribution 
dependencies which don't currently exist (e.g. you need sbase for ssys 
to be useful, and for severythingelse to be useful). I suppose that the 
top-level Makefile bits are small and could end up in both archives, 
where one can overwrite the other with the same thing. Would that solve 
your problem?

More information about the freebsd-arch mailing list