From owner-freebsd-libh Wed Apr 24 11:13:22 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Received: from mired.org (dsl-64-192-6-133.telocity.com [64.192.6.133]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D156137B405 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2002 11:13:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 58010 invoked by uid 100); 24 Apr 2002 18:12:53 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15558.62884.852620.270991@guru.mired.org> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 13:12:52 -0500 To: Antoine Beaupre Cc: freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: packaging base In-Reply-To: <0DFF2010-57A8-11D6-AE88-0050E4A0BB3F@anarcat.ath.cx> References: <15558.55806.422744.851621@guru.mired.org> <0DFF2010-57A8-11D6-AE88-0050E4A0BB3F@anarcat.ath.cx> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ From: Mike Meyer X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/0.52 (Python 2.2 on FreeBSD/i386) Sender: owner-freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In <0DFF2010-57A8-11D6-AE88-0050E4A0BB3F@anarcat.ath.cx>, Antoine Beaupre typed: > >> And libh will meet resistance not only from being a brand new system, > >> but also at trying to package base, which will break havoc among > >> developpers. > > > > How many developers use sysinstall, vs. rebuilding from source? Those > > are the only ones who are liable to care. If it's done right, then the > > new sysinstall should have packages defined by the NO* variables in > > /etc/defaults/make.conf, and should set the appropriate flags in > > /etc/make.conf for each part you don't load. > Please no. Please let's get rid of those variables. Please lets just > seperate the different parts of the tree clearly and isolate their > dependencies and let the developper make install where he wants. Using > variables, we'll end up with hundreds of them. It will be a maintenance > nightmare. Now you're talking about breaking "make buildworld", and that will generate a lot of resistance. It's not clear what you're proposing replacing it with, except for some portupgrade-like utility. > installworld is somehow doomed to go in the new scheme, as everything > will be a package and the line between base and ports will be blurred. > Everything installed through this procedure will have to be registered > through the package system. Yes, everything needs to be registered. No, installworld doesn't have to go away. I can see an installworld target that "knows" what packages are part of the base system, and only installs the ones that are already installed. That's actually cleaner than using make.conf variables. Buildworld can use similar tactics. But that's all *very* vague. A solid proposal is in order. Since you've apparently done more thinking on this than me, do you have one in mind? This is potentially something I can work on. Libh isn't, as I what little I know of tcl is enough to keep me from wanting to learn more. However, something like tcl is required, because part of the new port/package system is a safe way to encode actions on packages. http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-libh" in the body of the message