Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 10 Dec 2017 15:44:24 -0500
From:      Baho Utot <>
Subject:   Re: New packaging approach
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References:  <> <> <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help

On 12/10/2017 1:54 PM, doug wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Dec 2017, Baho Utot wrote:
>> On 12/10/2017 12:33 AM, DTD wrote:
>>> On Sat, 9 Dec 2017, Polytropon wrote:
>>>> However, I am not sure how the new packaging approach will handle 
>>>> this. As you might have read, pkg will be used for installing and 
>>>> upgrading OS files in the future, so there will not be the big 
>>>> difference "freebsd-update" and "pkg update" / "pkg upgrade".
>>> Where can I read about this? If this leads to dependency issues 
>>> similar to those encountered with desktops, my reaction is more of 
>>> 'oh s--t' rather then 'oh boy'. Back to the days when the odd or 
>>> even versions numbers were for those of us (read me) who do not 
>>> track Stable for similar reasons.
>> The way the packaging of base is currently being done will*guarantee 
>> a great level of OH SHIT.
> First, I will qualify my comments by saying I am an end user. I did 
> take Kurt McKusick's internals course a decade or so ago. Never ended 
> up going anywhere with C but it was/is a good way to understand the 
> workings and to be a better sysadmin. My experience with FreeBSD is 
> that once release engineering was fully integrated into the upgrade 
> process in the 4.x's, maybe the version 5 era (memory goes shortly 
> after the tolerance for coding 12 hrs/day) I have never had any issues 
> through cvsup, Subversion, and freebsd-update. If you follow the 
> releases, they work. Maybe if you are developing a port or are a 
> contributor to the base, things are not so rosy. But here in userland 
> things are better managed than IBM did with MFT, MVT into MVS. I'm 
> pretty sure those guys got paid pretty well and did not have to have a 
> day job to do what they really wanted to.
> That's a really wordy way to say I disagree with the idea that 
> development of the base OS has been mis-handled. In server-land since 
> 4.5 no gotcha's here (as a keeper of servers). Things are a bit 
> rougher if you want to run a FreeBSD workstation. On my current 
> desktop I have gimp, libre office and my window manager of choice. 613 
> packages and items built from ports. The pkg frame-work is much 
> improved over the old pkg_add et all. However, the number of 
> combinations of {613,n} where n is the number of shared libraries, 
> dynamic and static is a large number (finite but unbounded). And all 
> involved have to get all the dependencies right to have zero problems.
> My concern is, if it works don't fix it. And, if you must, I would 
> like to start getting up to speed on it ASAP. I have access to every 
> freebsd list but have not found a discussion of this. My only request 
> is to be pointed to where I can follow the discussion.

Have you ever used the "packaged base" If not you don't have a clue to 
just how bad it is

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>