Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 10 Dec 1995 12:27:51 -0600 (CST)
From:      Joe Greco <jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com>
To:        rkw@dataplex.net (Richard Wackerbarth)
Cc:        hackers@freefall.freebsd.org, jkh@time.cdrom.com
Subject:   Re: Sup's Freefall-centric tree conventions
Message-ID:  <199512101827.MAA23593@brasil.moneng.mei.com>
In-Reply-To: <v0213050bacf0d00398a5@[199.183.109.242]> from "Richard Wackerbarth" at Dec 10, 95 12:14:16 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I think that we are basically in agreement. 

Yes  :-)

> My only objection to your
> scheme is that it is FreeBSD-centric. What if I also want to support
> NetBSD? I therefore feel that "FreeBSD" (or "freebsd", I happen to prefer
> the caps, but that is personal preference) needs to appear somewhere in the
> path. The important thing from the user's point of view is that by simply
> changing "sup.freebsd.org" into "sup.uk.freebsd.org" or "sup1.freebsd.org",
> he can get the same results. And further, having gotten the results, I can
> turn around and supserve them to someone else.

I would certainly agree.  I have zero objection to it!  ;-)

> Further, those results should not step on the underlying system. We should
> be prepared to support multiple versions of the OS and multiple OS's in the
> archive scheme without them stepping on each other.
> 
> I would be happy with /FreeBSD/2.1/src or /sup/FreeBSD/cvs or ...

Well I prefer to put things under functional hierarchies.  I propose we
consider

/sup/FreeBSD/current
/sup/FreeBSD/stable
/sup/FreeBSD/cvs

unless someone has a better reason.  Matter of fact, I have someone on their
way down to the office now, to discuss these very issues, and he will be
setting up and helping to maintain the archive system here at sol.net.

> I think we also need to rethink the "ports" situation a bit.
> Although it is generally the case that the latest port of xxxx will work
> with any of the FreeBSD-2.x releases, we will come to a point where the
> port for 2.1 is different from the port for 2.2. How do we reasonably
> assure that the user easily gets the correct version for his system?

This has always bothered me as well.  However it seems like you need a lot
of space to maintain the distfiles  :-)

... Joe

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Greco - Systems Administrator			      jgreco@ns.sol.net
Solaria Public Access UNIX - Milwaukee, WI			   414/342-4847



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199512101827.MAA23593>