The OpenBSD developers are not too thrilled to hear about these sorts of issues, but looks like sysupgrade installed sets I didn't have before (x*66.tgz, game66.tgz).
It does that. You can hack the script to only install partial sets, but you're encouraged to install all the sets.
I've seen at least one mention on the mailing list about merging the sets because the recommendation is to always install all of them anyway. They're just files on disk if you're not using them.
Instead of hacking the script, you can run it with -n. You can then edit /auto_uograde.conf before reboot to instruct the installer to only install the desired sets.
As noted elsewhere, the developers recommend installing all sets. I personally prefer to avoid installing the X sets on servers.
And yeah, you're right, even light criticism on the OpenBSD lists is met with a very strong and negative reaction. That said, I think improvement suggestions that come with a diff and a constructive attitude are generally well received.
Also sysupgrade is a pretty brief ksh script, so fairly easy to see what it's doing.
Why ruin it for the majority because a few doesn't known what they are doing? I know the argument is that everyone has the disk space these days, but I still don't like to install the entire X window system, compilers etc. for a small embedded system. What's next, force install of Libreoffice and Firefox because a few desktop users can't use the package manager?
The thing I realized about OpenBSD is it’s made by and for the developers. They are going to do what works for them and fits their priorities. Not what works for the widest possible audience.
Yes and I agree with 99% of all the things they do, and appreciate them, but the thing with threating to merge all file sets because the few people non-deliberately choosing the non-default case are tripping over their incorrectly tied shoelaces too much. why not just ignore those few people and not force X window system binaries on thousands of network equipment?
I suppose you could just keep posting this until they follow through with their idea of having only one set to prevent people like you from complaining about this non issue. Or do you think being passive aggressive on hacker news is going to change their collective, long held stance on this issue?
In the 90s disks were smaller and it might have made more sense to exclude compilers or exclude X. I used to not put X on headless machines. But today disk space is big and cheap.
I hope they're real complaints and not i.e. we need install menu changed from "install xserver [x]" to "how u liek the xserver? now[ ] never[ ] now with extra firefox, please[x]"
It is completely unimaginable for OpenBSD to have Firefox in the base system. This is a very big misunderstanding of what goes in base vs. ports tree. Even with all the sets, the OpenBSD system without any ports is small compared to, say, a typical Linux distro.