Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 12:24:36 -0400 From: "Louis A. Mamakos" <louie@TransSys.COM> To: Thomas Seck <tmseck-lists@netcologne.de> Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Package system flaws? Message-ID: <200207141624.g6EGOa0L033175@whizzo.transsys.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 14 Jul 2002 17:57:28 %2B0200." <20020714155728.GA4237@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org> References: <p05111700b953ed16c118@[128.113.24.47]> <p05111701b953f38542f8@[128.113.24.47]> <20020712121427.GD3678@lummux.tchpc.tcd.ie> <20020712144854.GA756@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org> <20020713054141.A26277@misty.eyesbeyond.com> <20020713011750.GA755@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org> <20020714042237.GD931@lizzy.catnook.com> <20020714042623.GB95460@squall.waterspout.com> <20020714095939.GA588@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org> <200207141333.g6EDXj0L031673@whizzo.transsys.com> <20020714155728.GA4237@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> * Louis A. Mamakos (louie@TransSys.COM):
>
> > If you've decided to install optional software on your system using
> > the ports mechanism, then it doesn't seem too extreme a requirement
> > that you install a port or package to maintain your ports/packages.
>
> Sorry, I cannot follow this kind of reasoning. The problem with
> portupgrade is that you _need_ it to correct the flaws of the current
> pkg_* tools. And the more people start recommending the use of
> portupgrade to new users, the less likely it is that the real issues
> with the ports/package system ll ever get fixed.
And so what's so difficult to understand? Why is it that the only
tools "qualified" for use in maintaining the ports on a machine seem
to be required to be in the base system? From what I can tell, the
direction is to move non-essential stuff out of the base system.
Again, I don't see why it's so burdensome to type 'make install' in
the /usr/ports/sysutils/portupgrade directory.
> > cvsup isn't in the base system, but we manage to use it to keep both
> > the base system and ports up to date.
>
> What has cvsup got to do with it? You can keep your sources up to date
> with cvs too. cvsup is designed to be more efficient than cvs. It is not
> a bandaid like portupgrade. And yes, I do not like the fact, that it is
> written in Modula 3 instead of C{,++}.
Those users that don't just install off of CDROM distributions, and
try to keep up to date with the -STABLE branch or the HEAD of the CVS
tree use cvsup to update their systems. At least when I was involved
in running one of the CVS mirrors, the only server running was cvsupd.
So there's an even more critical tool, only available as a port or
package, in wide use.
Why do you care what the implementation language of the tool is if it
solves the problem? Shouldn't we be pleased there even exists a tool
in the first place?
> > I suspect the only result of an attempt to re-write sysutils/portupgrade
> > in a different language will be that the current developer of that tool
> > will disappear. I suspect he chose his implementation lanaguge for a
> > reason. Do you want the tool and developer, or a version in awk/sed/C?
>
> Did you ask knu about it or is this speculation on your part? Again, I
> did not say that the portupgrade _port_ should be rewritten. I meant
> that one should re-implement the tools knu wrote and put them into the
> base system as a short term solution. A mid-term solution would be to
> correct the issues with the dependency handling within the base system.
> When this is done, people should think about new ways to pack and
> transport packages.
I guess no one is stopping you from reimplementing your own wheel, er,
tool to replicate the functionality of the one that's already working
pretty good.
And no, I haven't spoken to knu about his opinion. I based that remark
on how I'd react if someone were to come along and say, "I really like
your software, but I need you to re-write it in a language that I like
for essentially no good reason."
louie
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200207141624.g6EGOa0L033175>