From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 11 04:59:42 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63AA11065676 for ; Sun, 11 Apr 2010 04:59:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rnoland@FreeBSD.org) Received: from gizmo.2hip.net (gizmo.2hip.net [64.74.207.195]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F5C88FC0C for ; Sun, 11 Apr 2010 04:59:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.4] (adsl-154-198-33.ard.bellsouth.net [72.154.198.33]) (authenticated bits=0) by gizmo.2hip.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o3B4xdWh032012 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 11 Apr 2010 00:59:40 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from rnoland@FreeBSD.org) From: Robert Noland To: Bruce Simpson In-Reply-To: <4BC088D3.3010908@incunabulum.net> References: <4BBFD502.1010507@elischer.org> <4BC088D3.3010908@incunabulum.net> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: FreeBSD Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 23:59:34 -0500 Message-Id: <1270961974.13132.41.camel@balrog.2hip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.3 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00, FH_DATE_PAST_20XX, RCVD_IN_PBL,RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL,RDNS_DYNAMIC,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.2.5 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on gizmo.2hip.net Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports and PBIs X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 04:59:42 -0000 On Sat, 2010-04-10 at 15:18 +0100, Bruce Simpson wrote: > On 04/10/10 02:31, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > > Alfred Perlstein , Matt at ix systems Kris (Mr PBI), some > > others and I, felt that these ideas seemed to make some sense > > and so I put them here for comment. > > Please do. Someone has to do something about deployment. > > For what it's worth, I've tripped over the garden rake on the ground, > that is 'unsatisfied dependency' one too many times in commercial work. > > If PBIs can address this, even for FreeBSD's embedded and server use > cases, they will likely be well recieved. If I understood the PBI construct correctly... How is this really that different than just producing static binaries? I mean, as I understood it, your bundling the binary and all of it's required libraries into a private directory tree and then playing linker games. robert. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" -- Robert Noland FreeBSD