Re: /usr/src and /usr/ports not git directories ?

On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 10:35:18PM +0200, Sulev-Madis Silber wrote:
> not shipping src in installer? what could possibly go wrong!
> 
> i was just thinking of this the other day. that installers are self-contained packages that come with os and it's source...
> 
> 
> 
There's no harm (and indeed, some good) in offering source code 
as a component of a new installation. What confused me was having
that source code offered as a dead end. After a little poking around
it's clear that including /usr/src/.git would have added close to
to 2 GB to the size of the installer. Perhaps not unacceptable, 
but surely undesirable. Maybe that's reason enough for present
practice of installing a dead /usr/src..

As a matter of naive curiosity, could one efficiently update /usr/src
using something like sftp -ar ? It wouldn't preserve the revision detail
git does, but seemingly it would download modified files while saving
for re-use those that haven't changed. For users who don't make local
mods it might be sufficient.
  

> On January 21, 2025 10:09:43 PM GMT+02:00, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> wrote:
> ...
> >I think that /usr/src and /usr/ports as part of FreeBSD release
> >distribution should just go away.  But we should provide a one liner
> >command to get them in a proper way (shallow git checkout).
> >

Do you mean have the "install src" checkbox invoke git clone?
That seems like a better idea, at least to me.  

bob prohaska