OptionalObsoleteFiles.inc completeness

Doug Barton dougb at FreeBSD.org
Tue May 29 04:20:26 UTC 2012

On 5/28/2012 3:05 PM, Dmitry Marakasov wrote:
> * Doug Barton (dougb at FreeBSD.org) wrote:
>>>> this issue. The numerous problems we've had with it ever since it was
>>>> introduced seem to bear me out. :)
>>> Can you list them? A missing obsolete file doesn't count.
>> It doesn't catch things it needs to
>> It catches things it shouldn't
>> The current incarnation is painfully slow (so I've heard)
>> 	... and the biggest problem ...
>> It needs to be updated manually
> Pretty true. Still I'd like to fix what we have now, than not to
> have a useful feature.

A question was raised about named.conf, so I answered it. A question was
raised about why I don't like/use Obsolete, so I answered it. At no
point did I say "don't work on Obsolete."

That said, my concern about this is the same as my concern about effort
being placed into other less-than-desirable solutions.

1. The effort could be better placed elsewhere
2. The fact that $SOMEONE is working on $SOMETHING gives people a warm
fuzzy feeling that has a tendency to diminish the urgency towards
putting real fixes to real problems.

So once again, I'm not saying "don't do it." But since someone actually
asked for my opinion ... :)



    This .signature sanitized for your protection

More information about the freebsd-current mailing list