Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 02:39:32 -0700 From: Jeremy Chadwick <freebsd@jdc.parodius.com> To: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> Cc: Bapt <bapt@freebsd.org>, Florent Thoumie <flz@freebsd.org>, Julien Laffaye <jlaffaye@freebsd.org>, David Forsythe <dforsyth@freebsd.org>, Garrett Cooper <gcooper@freebsd.org>, Tim Kientzle <kientzle@freebsd.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Anonymous <swell.k@gmail.com> Subject: Re: what next for the pkg_install rewrite Message-ID: <20100830093932.GA28927@icarus.home.lan> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikVmBz6Y%2BqACr3Hku4yPWMyJW4kWZDGwGTSxhF-@mail.gmail.com> References: <AANLkTimY=FJas-oXkWwO07QtaD%2BGrLockgJ_SZQJ7UHM@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimhh2vOtXUb-frzWcZmANWyEC7oPtTgepzvOtSB@mail.gmail.com> <4C6DA0FA.7080203@DataIX.net> <AANLkTi=h_GdAFbZ2X0agCAtyLLiwNrMoLx_ZunhBBx2=@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinn4utHttMPsCN1GKp1dTPOdTJAtLgG3m8BfLgw@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTi=F_sbOWXkXkqAZ00xu9E44m8gPhD39kGet01vu@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTi=1ons1-6xf83VTNZfQdhzaZpyA7w8U6z6VQ0-Q@mail.gmail.com> <20100820124332.GB1786@azathoth.lan> <86lj7o7e6e.fsf@gmail.com> <AANLkTikVmBz6Y%2BqACr3Hku4yPWMyJW4kWZDGwGTSxhF-@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 11:27:58AM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote: > On 30 August 2010 09:27, Anonymous <swell.k@gmail.com> wrote: > > > We can as well use Lua tables to store package database. Their syntax is > > close to JSON. > > > > Besides, I think it's better to divorce ports from base so that pkg_* > > tools can evolve faster and are not limited to dependencies from base. > > The only thing we'd need to leave in base is smth like pkg_bootstrap. > > IMO, this chicken and egg problem is getting quite annoying. > > Speaking of Lua, I had a thread on this in -current which went IMO > fairly well, mostly because Lua is a clean and easy language to import > compared to, e.g. Perl, TCL or Python. As I see it, there will not be > heavy opposition if Lua is to be imported. > > In short, if there is going to be a scripting language for pkg_*, Lua > is sort-of "pre-approved" - as opposed to ksh and others mentioned > here. Lua would make a nice addition for an unrelated reason (I don't follow -current so someone may have mentioned this already): there is an interest in replacing the Forth/FICL pieces of the FreeBSD bootloader with something in Lua instead. Rink Springer and I discussed this (either in Email or on IRC, I forget), and both of us have interest in such. For those curious about Lua, I highly recommend the book "Programming in Lua" (2nd Edition). -- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc@parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB |
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100830093932.GA28927>