4 ms·
>HOWTO upgrade >Remove files no longer included in the current release of perl(1): Do they consider this a production-grade operating system or a toy one? Why
by ernst_klim 7y ago
>HOWTO upgrade
>Remove files no longer included in the current release of perl(1):
Do they consider this a production-grade operating system or a toy one? Why couldn't it be done with a package manager?
- brynet 7y agoBecause perl is part of the base system, and not a package, harmless files are typically not removed by the OpenBSD Installer. You don't have to remove those files, the upgrade guide simply indicates they're no longer required.
- ernst_klim 7y agoSure, but manual upgrades with `tar'ring userspace, copying kernel and removing files seems abysmally error-prone to me.
- eb0la 7y agoIn the past problems could happen if your kernel ended beyond cylinder 1024 on the disk (i386 problem) You should have a disklabel with partitioning for at least /, /usr, /usr/lib, /var, and /home (with / fully behind cylinder 1024 for i386 Bios to be able to load the kernel via int13h )
- brynet 7y agoYou're reading the manual upgrade guide, for remote systems where you would otherwise cannot boot the ramdisk kernel to upgrade, which handles all of that for you. If you have console access to the machine, serial or glass. Things are far easier.
- tedunangst 7y agoMore evidence the hard way instructions should simply be deleted.
- smhenderson 7y agoDon't let one guy ruin it for the rest of us! Thanks for your work on OpenBSD Ted.
- protomyth 7y agoI would move them to a separate page and not delete them. Sometimes you need to know something about dealing with the ugly. Nice work and your blog is great.
- bigato 7y ago> harmless files are typically not removed by the OpenBSD Installer I also don't understand the reasoning behind this.
- asark 7y agoOn the one hand, cruft hanging around sucks. On the other hand, leaving stuff alone if you can is safer. Meanwhile dist-upgrade on my vanilla, boring Ubuntu MATE box rendered it unbootable just yesterday.
- aquabeagle 7y agoIt's your system, the installer doesn't know what you're doing with it. Maybe you have your own programs depending on those files?
- whalesalad 7y agoFunny you say that. I can see your perspective but at the same time the beauty of Unix is that the OS is really just a bunch of files you can see and manipulate yourself. The system doesn’t have convoluted registry systems for instance to hold state. So for me, deleting a few files is as good as or better than asking a package manager to do it. It proves to me that the OS is simple. I think we have become so accustomed to complexity that now we often seek it because the simple way “couldn’t possibly be right?”
- ernst_klim 7y ago>I can see your perspective but at the same time the beauty of Unix Ah, beauty of unix =) Using commands with terrible interfaces, lack of error messages and confirmation dialogs, which silently wipe your whole FS if you mistype them. Yeah, I would like to upgrade using a bunch of these (no, not really).
- CameronNemo 7y agoWow this is gatekeeping if I have ever seen it before. A package manager that tracks all files installed by a distribution of software is an excellent tool, and in no way incompatible with the Unix philosophy.
- whalesalad 7y agoI'm incredibly curious in hearing your rationalization for accusing me of this 'gatekeeping' ???
- anthk 7y agoUnix packages are an extra. On true Unixen, /usr and /usr/local exist for a reason.