I wondet if we can fix install...

I've not hit the // issue. When does it happen?

I used awk to omit first arg same as last. I think the -u is likely useless.

I'm cool removing devd. I was cool having people add it back manually if need be.

I'm cool with it off by default too.
But then I'd have to hunt down the builds scripts for the release and add it there :)

Not so sure about the expression rewrite, but it's not likely to change to 5 / 4 or 7 /3 any time soon

Assuming they are recrusive, this looks perfect.

I know it's just for cross compiling, but maybe we can use the version we have in cdefs.h to avoid other foot-cannons in the future? The only reason this works is the || <something that works> in the instant use case.

/*
 * Macro to test if we're using a specific version of gcc or later.
 */
#if defined(__GNUC__)
#define __GNUC_PREREQ__(ma, mi) \
        (__GNUC__ > (ma) || __GNUC__ == (ma) && __GNUC_MINOR__ >= (mi))
#else
#define __GNUC_PREREQ__(ma, mi) 0
#endif

In D52923#1209247, @ivy wrote:

In D52923#1209241, @imp wrote:

I'd commit bsd.conf.mk as its own commot. I did this to subdirs years ago

i could split this into two commits if you insist, but i'd rather not. the changes to both files are self-contained, so it will look fine in the history.

I'd commit bsd.conf.mk as its own commot. I did this to subdirs years ago

In D52911#1209111, @cperciva wrote:

In D52911#1208992, @imp wrote:

So why aren't we using this mtree in the process? It should have added to the metalog in make distribute since that's what uses this...

We're now building cloudware from pkgbase, so we don't run make distribute. So I guess the real question is why /boot/efi didn't end up in any of the pkgbase packages.

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=289997

Except it is in BSD.root.dist:

...
    boot
...
       efi
...

This is obscure enough we may want to have a comment..

Looking at the hardware driver suggests this page is even more out of date than I thought.
I don't have time to enumerate everything here.

In D52833#1207111, @brooks wrote:

In D52833#1207103, @imp wrote:

Fun. Commit message could be better at explaining why this happens with the old code

There's no functional change. It's just that I copied and pasted without tabs.

Fun. Commit message could be better at explaining why this happens with the old code

I suspect this is fine. ISA is all the on boatd IO that's ioport mapped that's not part of pci. It most likely is lpc based and the ACPI enumeration of that jardware should hang off this bus, not the acpi bus for the software model. But practically, this is easier and there's not enough difference to mater.

PDP_ENDIAN was the spelling. It was also the order for a subset of pdp-11 compilers.

So internally to the build system, MACHINE and MACHINE_ARCH are used. When cross building, for various technical reasons, you have to set TARGET and/or TARGET_ARCH. When one can be guessed from the other (as is the case for all architectures except powerpc), you need only set one, the other one will be inferred. For powerpc, setting TARGET_ARCH alone is sufficient, so maybe we should recommend that for all cases. I'd put a cross reference to arch(7) since MACHINE and MACHINE_ARCH, and their allowed values, are explained in detail. The make target only lists a subset of allowed values at times when we've deprecated some targets but haven't yet removed them .

update comments, some minor tweaking

This looks good to me.

So this is a bit tricky for why we're doing this and how it solves the problem. See suggestion for a comment.

Aarch64 too

This is needed also for arm64

Python looks ok

I like base way better than packages, which has the sane issues as pkgbase, and it's too generic.

So is this the place to document the config files you need to fetch a custom repo?
Or what the distdir settings are for -current and -stable and how to get releases?
Or that if you pkg install all these things, you still need to do some flavoring to the system (fstab, rc.conf, loader.conf and a few others)

Spammy how? Unlike ports, UPDATING isn't automatically displayed. I imagine that they'd slow way down once we have the deck chairs just so...

You might want to look at ~imp/armv7-pkgbase-14.3-exp.sh which generates a bootable image w/o root for armv7 with the correct perms using pkgbase + pkg to create the system.

Might be a few more nits, but we're getting close to time to just accept what's done and do further refinement later.

W/o measuring it, or knowing what the NIC is doing, it's hard to say how good the results from this will be.

This looks better now. Doing things better next time is fine.

this is ready too!

This is ready!

There's a few of these elsewhere in the nanobsd tree.
It's also the only place in the tree we do this style, so this is good, I think.

I'm surprised this hasn't been done sooner

I didn't see anything in the implementation of the MI parts to give me heartburn.