Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 08:12:52 +0000 From: Matthew Seaman <matthew@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <56D94384.5030901@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20160304010949.GC48568@FreeBSD.org> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <22232.56734.691784.696540@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> <20160304010949.GC48568@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --fUaPTfc54NoRMtGhk7tR0NKjd9KViQ7xt Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="jI9KsCSdheEGsP0DFc4SjsIapAVasOGjO" From: Matthew Seaman <matthew@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Message-ID: <56D94384.5030901@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <22232.56734.691784.696540@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> <20160304010949.GC48568@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20160304010949.GC48568@FreeBSD.org> --jI9KsCSdheEGsP0DFc4SjsIapAVasOGjO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 04/03/2016 01:09, Glen Barber wrote: >> I was prepared to freak out at this, but with half the packages >> > consisting of debugging symbols for binaries that ship stripped in >> > 10.x anyway (so most users would never need nor install those >> > packages), the number isn't so unreasonable. I get 531 non-"-debug-= " >> > packages here, which is still more than I'd like but tolerable given= >> > how many of them will never be installed. (Could some of those >> > library packages be consolidated? > This was intentional. If, for example, there is a libxo bug that > requires an EN or SA, we do not want the binary upgrade to exceed more > than required. Bapt's presentation at BSDCan last year explained the reasoning behind how the base was divided up into packages. He said at the time that it was impossible to do in a way that wouldn't get complaints from someone, so he opted for maximum flexibility -- meaning a lot of fine-grained packages plus a heirarchy of meta-packages to make it easy to install and manage package sets in commonly used combinations. So, for instance, there might be a 'FreeBSD-debug' that would depend on 'FreeBSD-library-debug', 'FreeBSD-application-debug' etc. and 'FreeBSD-library-debug' would depend on the individual 'FreeBSD-libfoo-debug' packages that actually install the symbol files. (So you could strip all the debug symbols from your install by 'pkg delete -fR FreeBSD-debug') I'm not seeing any of those meta packages in the base repo built following Glen's instructions -- is there some other step necessary to generate them? Cheers, Matthew --jI9KsCSdheEGsP0DFc4SjsIapAVasOGjO-- --fUaPTfc54NoRMtGhk7tR0NKjd9KViQ7xt Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJW2UOKXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ2NTNBNjhCOTEzQTRFNkNGM0UxRTEzMjZC QjIzQUY1MThFMUE0MDEzAAoJELsjr1GOGkATK+MQAKxs8GIA+ID9XC3zYaqMwAtk VFC6E9W32pLXUZKvCSHY9bdqRqsLQWUm6HLcc+Zm+cTF/TaMO0C7HkyDeu7vRd+q Ba2I4uO4EEf8EpGsMu8GA0pV8pz/GueiSwscc5vBP/kbsOpc68gw3leNg23djoUh J2cBeyAy/sQz/MZ0L1+acf+DL72MuYs6fSjwct7rQ9u+IceZVUJIa97UoSU+bmMA +IajZsiYskjZ/1sw21vV1+DEKefXFmmiHGqQr6jQJUcIU+1wqzmLnwq2Mc+ZLWXL iHicn+ptifW2TTrPfg9rHl2YeUnal0DKRcDpjPz7U4XuHemAqd31dPuVhXe19x8a jsKg2KJKgTyepLMeAwEEVQSfTMGDQIW+peKZh5mT5z8xXU/xVp0seqqu1hR1YG4+ 4+Fgu2QHrpaW0YMPPLPFQqMh/DT53jXwkPESW6qWxjxEmzy1tbmMkO2k4zI8kghv STd/VO9sa3wGqBz7MGUH6BNCck8D1L9/5ZhxhjWA9HmeGYDPEWsiV78Zf/rNx2Mb +r2MEpbc+qXiKXDMcEMcfIgF3hWt5XTc7PJbByeQ4Sj0ZrD+PUhkUZwVxdTicoxq yKznrFdJYI8zuvroHmYQFx659j0vN/cTm/9w/8P4iJXkou7A/HBnUxO4YXzrdl9Z mQZcGrOxuXhrnA3D3Lgp =EYby -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --fUaPTfc54NoRMtGhk7tR0NKjd9KViQ7xt--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?56D94384.5030901>