From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com ([64.147.123.19]) by ewsd; Mon Jun 24 15:48:14 EDT 2019 Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42880536 for <9front@9front.org>; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 15:48:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 24 Jun 2019 15:48:12 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.fm; h= mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type; s=fm3; bh=/gUzzhhoPlPIKxHfg8i+zuOBl93AWXa 0pDxnAh95Qd4=; b=iIPmlcO8Qlv1d5cHNh0kuQOoFyOjCeEpK7y99+C3n0EglJd 1tgMLFMgA5xaGHHYeWmPNFrgyzyfls+s2pT9S7C6EctchfIOWjxEoFzvRyj7JmSg gnnynmBv8fKd1IU1T4PBZqJdy7io56buXs6ZcPUcr1vYmovIdJm677H7Ow6gII+5 ZwZNy1MHrabh1r/LzH84HZHBAAKGRy6LjV6NuvXdPGPr1cZQbH6vD0N+VuRuA7YY V3KyHNWQHtclJGwwVsCjZUdUIFWhwpkvLyDccJH8V4YmlCDx/sRznzt6ujwauZng VSsH+1CG+k1ooPrar6/+MrbBUbkCf7JznISMYog== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=/gUzzh hoPlPIKxHfg8i+zuOBl93AWXa0pDxnAh95Qd4=; b=o96sUhk0ewV75MiGFgzgAw O3JwxioZmLjrukeSvhJ6RaU3jhdESuNmBv6Y44hQyts9NgpP8TAazrbYYwRPkWWy Cml+uQTEsn7UKwLnFnPsierqW1W9Dpa8TRbZPnIhVLS/UpZx8RWbXJZ51xpKMK/f wkkYN0RsJO94FMC/M7RJw2JKQtnXp83fC/OHs9TY5wJzGwyUhukGs9shUm18MuWw se5k8CdAFKe4sCdeyAK5GZ8lLIaRDFzFgZUO+/n30KhxaqAP7XaC4ZKOmDvnacQd sMYtdgFnd+k/cxN9iFyGCC/kr6FnqR8pNkvQWp/R9pRaA4K9FjxMJD19Y7yiZNYw == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddruddvgddugeehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsehttd ertderredtnecuhfhrohhmpedfgfhthhgrnhcuifgrrhguvghnvghrfdcuoegvvghkvggv heejsehfrghsthhmrghilhdrfhhmqeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepvggvkh gvvgehjeesfhgrshhtmhgrihhlrdhfmhenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 5E445E00A2; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 15:48:11 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.6-730-g63f2c3b-fmstable-20190622v1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <42f586ab-07a3-4d42-a7d3-e9e2971aa207@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <021E44EDB2CBC6D1026A5D0D2A63D92F@felloff.net> References: <021E44EDB2CBC6D1026A5D0D2A63D92F@felloff.net> Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 20:48:11 +0100 From: "Ethan Gardener" To: 9front@9front.org Subject: Re: [9front] 7c: compile error after sysupdate Content-Type: text/plain List-ID: <9front.9front.org> List-Help: X-Glyph: ➈ X-Bullshit: non-blocking ISO-certified base template API STM frontend On Mon, Jun 24, 2019, at 8:05 PM, cinap_lenrek@felloff.net wrote: > > would it be a good idea to have sysupdate source rootstub? > > i worked on this for a day and then gave up. its too hard and > too complicated. > > sysupdate would need some check to update itself in case > there needs to be stuff like this. but how do you deploy > THAT change? the only way is to fork everything. have > a thumbstone commit with the sysupdate change. and then > the next sysupdate goes to a new repository. hmm... i've got an idea. as you say below, it won't help with adding dirs to /, but just for fun: i don't think you'd need a new repository, but you would need a way for sysupdate to check and update itself first. the first update would be trouble, you're right there. after that, it wouldn't be complex with one or two helper scripts. sysupdate could have just 2 lines (plus #!), the first running sysupdate-updater, the second execs sysupdate-doit. sysupdate-updater updates sysupdate-doit, but sysupdate and sysupdate-updater would be updated by hg as normal, because they're not running when hg is. not that the 2-line sysupdate would ever need updating. i could code this, if you'd like it. > on the other hand, its not so easy to automate creating > stuff in the root. initially, the root of the fileserver > was readonly and the only way to create directories there > was console command. what if you don't run sysupdate on > the fileserver but from a cpu server? then you can't > access the fileserver console. oh yes, of course.