In D37528#855219, @grahamperrin wrote:

Abandon?

Approved.

In D34746#851847, @gjb wrote:

In D34746#851841, @emaste wrote:

@gjb can we get this approved? (This is what was used to generate the 13.1 image available in Oracle Cloud.)

I thought we were waiting on API keys/credentials. Am I wrong in this regard?

In any case, provided OCI is not enabled by default in the CLOUDWARE list, approved.

In D34746#851841, @emaste wrote:

@gjb can we get this approved? (This is what was used to generate the 13.1 image available in Oracle Cloud.)

In D37449#851673, @pauamma wrote:

In D37449#851526, @gjb wrote:

Approved

Mentor approval only (in which case I'll wait a bit more), or should I also take this as manpages approval?

Approved

Approved.

Approved.

Approved.

Approved.

Approved.

There is implicit mentor approval for these initial commits. No explicit doc-committer approval is required.

Approved, regardless of in-line comment above.

In D35405#845140, @pauamma wrote:

Little to no point creating makework for everyone, then. (Was your comment approval as well?)

It was not approval in this case, as releng/12.4 requires approval from the re@ team.

My turn to be unclear, I guess. By "Little to no point creating makework for everyone, then", I meant I wasn't going to pursue that MFC, only MFCing into 13-stable. I was asking about overall approval, excluding the MFC into 12.4 which I abandoned.

Note, as your mentor, and as someone involved in this particular change request against releng/12.4, I cannot approve the change myself.

Noted for future reference if needed, thanks.

In D35405#845105, @pauamma wrote:

In D35405#845058, @gjb wrote:

In D35405#844742, @pauamma wrote:

NTS: bump Dd on commit.

@gjb, is this worth getting into 12.4 for the experience getting a change into a releng version, or is it too minor to bother?

I think it may be too minor to worry about it, but I will not object to it.

Little to no point creating makework for everyone, then. (Was your comment approval as well?)

In D34385#845102, @pauamma wrote:

In D34385#845057, @gjb wrote:

In D34385#844520, @pauamma wrote:

I can commit this when doc slush is over (should be soon).

You can go ahead and commit it at your convenience. The doc tree has been tagged for 12.4-RELEASE.

Taking that as (implicit) mentor approval.

Approved.

In D35405#844742, @pauamma wrote:

NTS: bump Dd on commit.

@gjb, is this worth getting into 12.4 for the experience getting a change into a releng version, or is it too minor to bother?

In D34385#844520, @pauamma wrote:

I can commit this when doc slush is over (should be soon).

Approved, provided portmgr is fine with the change. Sorry for the delay.

Approved.

Approved.

In D37004#840306, @bapt wrote:

I don't think we should offer the choice, we should only default on the sane approach which is the symlink. people should be able to cp by themselves if they are in a corner case.

In D36705#839384, @gjb wrote:

Approved. Sorry, I missed this review.

Approved. Sorry, I missed this review.

In D36941#839031, @markmi_dsl-only.net wrote:

For:

ln -s efi ${DESTDIR}/boot/msdos

msdos points to efi in the same directory. No implicit / generation.

For:

ln -s /boot/efi ${DESTDIR}/boot/msdos

msdos points to /boot/efi .

Both ways reach the same file, as long as msdos is not moved to a different directory anyway.

Hmm. I'm actually wondering if it should be

ln -s /boot/efi ${DESTDIR}/boot/msdos

Thank you for the quick fix.