From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 11 00:57:20 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCB9E106566C for ; Sat, 11 Apr 2009 00:57:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from glen.j.barber@gmail.com) Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com [209.85.198.228]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0AA18FC15 for ; Sat, 11 Apr 2009 00:57:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from glen.j.barber@gmail.com) Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id l9so1188551rvb.43 for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2009 17:57:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=HjTh7n1laLUsPtO1aT+KksCw9TZUwqomSPHuAxq46ws=; b=bd4QWbB3xmQ6l05JgusHjbyuhm3OmMn7QksfKn2vxCq8TuqLEfM/BOL73W3bwHwl+n ytY0dtWAG54VVfMxm0w5k7eFtSdvv3OzECwPTDDTaAFHmlAtMEdyPQXIvP/YlnERTsof AcmRTAJ+ZVfdLMmyzM2le+2LhN1mtak5elVBc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=bISjlLAo7nXZQZTb6VhAnefKO8Iz5AT7FH6Ua/GF0WVA5yDFvHv9CPar1KqaGcfPR/ vzMysm0RqfGQOErtDVJO0aHWC4o/Jpd5epLEqaEiHd7/qzD44gVDmu/2fyqEjdk95xLi U/bJbbndjud9bK7mUsZQAvqtbYWUELVWn320k= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.193.16 with SMTP id q16mr1682900rvf.38.1239411440356; Fri, 10 Apr 2009 17:57:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <49DFE46A.2080600@onetel.com> References: <49DBCB82.2090903@gmail.com> <4ad871310904071653hef9da1br6048618d4676d658@mail.gmail.com> <49DFE46A.2080600@onetel.com> Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 20:57:20 -0400 Message-ID: <4ad871310904101757m31e977ddxfa02c9d94d3ca5a4@mail.gmail.com> From: Glen Barber To: Chris Whitehouse Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: openoffice.org-3.01 packages available (i386) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 00:57:21 -0000 Hi, Chris. On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 8:29 PM, Chris Whitehouse wrote: > > When you have a minute please would you have a look at a proposal for > changes to the packages system I posted which is kind of a ports equivalent > of freebsd-update involving a 'ports-snapshot'. > [snip] I actually have been watching that thread. I am intrigued by what you are trying to do, but I think it's veering into the "difficult to maintain" territory. > > It's going a bit parallel to the discussion here and in fact you have > already offered some of the requirements,ie hosting > > Would you be interested in incorporating the idea into what you are doing? I > could at least do some building of packages. > What specifically do you have in mind? A "side project" to the FreeBSD pkg_add(1) tool or a separate collection of the Makefiles for the ports tree? > One of the requirements is a new package management tool which I've called > ports-update. Does anyone here have C or scripting skills who would be > interested to write it? I'm sorry to ask, I know the FreeBSD way is to do it > yourself, but I don't have programming skills. I could probably knock up a > framework to start from though. > I have (very little) C skills -- I'm an OOP guy. I have less skill with shell scripting. Either way, between ${REAL_JOB} and ${UNIVERSITY}, my "free time" is ... well... usually, not free. > If you are prepared to host a bunch of packages it would be interesting to > ask people to give us a list of their installed packages to create a master > list. > I'm more than happy to create space for this type of project, but keep in mind -- the pkg_add(1) tool will grab binary builds of software from the ports tree that is usually built with default options. What about that one user that wants -DNO_NETHACK for sysutils/screen, or the user (me) that has no need for IPv6 options enabled for most things? This seems like an exact mirror of pkg_add(1) in how it works, and IMHO would be impossible to keep a current (let alone versioned) collection of packages with every possible compile-time option. Of course, unless I am misunderstanding your intentions. -- Glen Barber