In D53064#1213503, @emaste wrote:

Two things feel a bit odd to me ([ -d DIR ] could be done directly in lua I think

here is the actual diff of this revision, as you can see no messages are removed:

In D53115#1213428, @jlduran wrote:

I think stanzas got crossed-over?

i can see two use cases for this:

pkgbase doesn't restart sshd on upgrade, but that's something we might want to consider if it causes problems not to do so. (i haven't run into that myself, but that's probably because i run sshd from inetd.)

In D53061#1212412, @ifreund_freebsdfoundation.org wrote:

Unless there is a bug somewhere I'm not aware of, split upgrades should not be a problem on the stable/15 branch after we stop re-arranging and moving files between packages constantly.

In D53061#1212288, @pi wrote:

Is it possible that there are still files in mqueue/ ? Would the delete/re-create lead to lost mail ?

i think this can be closed, since it was addressed differently in D52999.

i think we agreed this change is wrong, can we close the review?

i think this is no longer required since we fixed the mtree, and can be closed?

use onerestart instead of restart

is this still in flight? we need something for 15.0 since the current relnotes are wrong (they say this is disabled by default, which it's not since we backed off on that for now).

add missing zlib-all.ucl

could you please recreate the diff with -U9999 to include the missing context, or (preferably) use git arc which does this automatically? otherwise, it is much harder to see what changed.

i posted about this on stable@ and current@ a week ago and no has objected, so i'd really like to land this if possible.

i feel like this is really an issue in makefs: if it doesn't know the permissions for a directory, it should fail with an error, since 0 permissions is almost certainly going to be wrong. ideally, it would sort the METALOG itself to handle cases like this, although i don't know if that breaks anything else.

looks good

fix typo in bsd.man.mk

review feedback

okay, looks fine. thanks for the explanation.

following discussion with olce, add a MANNODEV group

i'm not opposed to this, but i don't understand why it's required. is this an upstream bug, or are we building libkrb5 wrongly?

In D52832#1210456, @olce wrote:

I'm wondering though if differing group names in each package (POSIX1E5, REGEX7, MAN57, etc.) is really useful.

In D53014#1211160, @imp wrote:

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

i think we could just use "Distribution sets" for the button label, since the prompt explains what these are.

it seems like you're missing a lot of stuff which is not toolchain-related, like for example bsnmp, csh, sendmail and yp. if that's intentional, the additional dependencies are not an issue with this diff and will be fixed later, so this looks fine.

In D53014#1211148, @dch wrote:

FreeBSD-devd

also tag /usr/share/et

i would like to know why upstream changed this before we change it back. has anyone asked them?