Hi, Theo de Raadt wrote on Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 07:15:34AM -0600:
> I am not thrilled with the name "kernel.conf". > It does not seem intuitively discoverable. What would be a canonical name? It is a command file for config(8). Note that the "config-file" for config is something else, and that other thing is also called a "kernel configuration file", and it is located in places like /sys/arch/luna88k/conf/GENERIC iiuc. For command files, we normally use the name of the programming language as a suffix (*.sh, *.pl, *.py, *.awk, *.sed, ...). But here, the domain specific language is really config(8), and *.config does not work as a suffix because it is next to indistinguishable from *.conf, and we just saw this is *not* a configuration but a command file. The root cause of the terminologic mess here is that the choice of the name config(8) for the kernel configuration program was too generic in the first place, but we are almost exactly 40 years late for fixing that. One - admittedly completely unUNIXy - way would be to invent a long, descriptive name like /etc/kernel.config.commands or even /bsd.config.cmd in the root rather than the /etc directory, which is more discoverable because it is right next to the kernel itself. The UNIXy way is not necessarily better: Ken would have invented a very short, pronouncable name that is not an English word but similar to one, like /etc/sycoc (for SYstem COnfiguration Commands). Is /bsd.config.cmd good enough? Yours, Ingo > Paul de Weerd <[email protected]> wrote: >> Index: distrib/miniroot/install.sub [...] >> chroot /mnt /bin/ksh -e -c "cd ${_kernel_dir#/mnt}/$_kernel; \ >> - make newbsd; make newinstall" >> + make newbsd; \ >> + [ -e /etc/kernel.conf ] && \ >> + config -e -c /etc/kernel.conf -f bsd; \ >> + make newinstall" >> ) >/dev/null 2>&1 && echo " done." || echo " failed."
