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?

remove libexec/rc/rc.d changes

In D52959#1210211, @imp wrote:

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 :)

In D52958#1210057, @markmi_dsl-only.net wrote:

So boot/ showed up but nothing inside it did for use of the old BSD.root.dist

also fix the set packages

In D52923#1209241, @imp wrote:

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

the only potential problem i can see is if someone builds with KERNCONF=GENERIC X Y Z, then they will get all 4 kernels included if they build a VM image, which might not be desirable. but i think this is enough of an edge case that we don't need to address it right now.

regarding set-kernels, i'm not sure this should exist at all, but we needed somewhere to put the kernel packages that wasn't base, so that's fine for now (it certainly won't change in 15.0). i would suggest explicitly adding FreeBSD-kernel-generic{,-dbg} instead, but they're essentially the same thing right now.

on second thought: if lldb is the only special case here, you should switch to set-optional and then add the dev packages you need on top of that. i don't love that, but it's good enough for now.

In D52919#1209187, @cperciva wrote:

My EC2 "small" AMIs don't include FreeBSD-lldb. They include the rest of the "devel" set so that people can *build* things but most people don't want to *debug* things on production cloud systems. (And lldb is *huge*.)

In D52911#1209155, @cperciva wrote:

One possible option is simply to put a tags=package= field on every line of the mtree files, but I feel like there should probably be some sort of default handling for untagged entries in METALOG?

are there any VM images that don't install everything that's in FreeBSD-set-base? this is equivalent to base.txz.

document ${NLSPACKAGE}

PR for the pkg(8) issue mentioned in the commit message at https://github.com/freebsd/pkg/pull/2534

add a warning when unsetting CROSS_TOOLCHAIN, requested by emaste

the problem i see with this is it will be instantly obsolete once the first SA is released for 15.0. however if the purpose is to provide an easy way to people to get a reference set of package used to build a release (without having to extract it from the ISO) that seems fine.

review feedback

not tested but this looks fine in principle