From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org  Tue Apr 19 11:30:06 2016
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 759F7B147A0;
 Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:30:06 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from dan_partelly@rdsor.ro)
Received: from mail.rdsor.ro (mail.rdsor.ro [193.231.238.10])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF088114D;
 Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:30:05 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from dan_partelly@rdsor.ro)
Received: from email.rdsor.ro (ftp.rdsor.ro [193.231.238.4])
 by mail.rdsor.ro (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3541D8802;
 Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:30:03 +0300 (EEST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:30:13 +0300
From: dan_partelly <dan_partelly@rdsor.ro>
To: Lars Engels <lars.engels@0x20.net>
Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>, Alfred Perlstein
 <alfred@freebsd.org>, <lev@FreeBSD.org>, Glen Barber <gjb@FreeBSD.org>,
 Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org>, Sean Fagan <sef@ixsystems.com>,
 <freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org>, <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8)
In-Reply-To: <20160419102751.GM82927@e-new.0x20.net>
References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org>
 <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com>
 <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org>
 <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org>
 <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org>
 <4787f50d3f160e606ad55737e93a324a@rdsor.ro>
 <20160419102751.GM82927@e-new.0x20.net>
Message-ID: <317dbdbb2c31c17ad70ef213abdcdbf6@rdsor.ro>
X-Sender: dan_partelly@rdsor.ro
User-Agent: RoundCube Webmail/0.4-beta
X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." <freebsd-pkgbase.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-pkgbase>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-pkgbase-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-pkgbase/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-pkgbase-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-pkgbase>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-pkgbase-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:30:06 -0000


I dont know if you missed the point of my message on purpose or not.

I never pretended that you can't extract that information. I maintain that
having sane defaults would empower me to almost never care about aliases,
scripts
pipes, filter , regular expressions and what not. It is great that all
this power
is at my fingertips, in case something goes awfully wrong , not so great
when Im forced
to use it. 

And I really don't see how this helps anyway, since number of leafs will 
increase anyway with package base. 

Let me reiterate, perhaps clearer this time:

It is my opinion that sane defaults beat ANY script, obscure command line
arguments, 
alias, pipe, filter, helper program. 



> 
> Don't use "pkg info" then. Use "pkg leaf":
> 



 
> And to everyone complaining about the number of packages: How many of
> you have actually used the packaged base?

This question is irrelevant. 

1.First of all, many people consider packaging base a great
accomplishment, 
yet maybe not ready for prime-time, given the current way pkg handles this

information. I personally love the idea, with the caveats above. 

2. The issue is present with all meta-packages in general. The base
packaging
only exacerbate an existing issue with the sheer number of packages it
presents.