Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 18:05:53 -0400 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: Thomas Seck <tmseck-lists@netcologne.de>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Package system flaws? Message-ID: <p0511170cb9579c8bdff1@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <20020714095939.GA588@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org> References: <3D27A296.D58FB4B4@softweyr.com> <p05111745b94e9452f3b3@[128.113.24.47]> <p05111700b953ed16c118@[128.113.24.47]> <p05111701b953f38542f8@[128.113.24.47]> <20020712121427.GD3678@lummux.tchpc.tcd.ie> <20020712144854.GA756@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org> <20020713054141.A26277@misty.eyesbeyond.com> <20020713011750.GA755@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org> <20020714042237.GD931@lizzy.catnook.com> <20020714042623.GB95460@squall.waterspout.com> <20020714095939.GA588@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 11:59 AM +0200 7/14/02, Thomas Seck wrote: >* Will Andrews (will@csociety.org): > >> The people who do the work should do it the best way they can. >> Or, with a volunteer twist, the most enjoyable way they can. > >Agreed. But portupgrade(1) is somewhat special, because it is >the only way you can keep your locally installed packages up >to date without thrashing your pkg db. "If you write it, they will come". If a superior solution shows up in C, people will be happy to use it. People are happy to use portupgrade because it is better than not using it. >Being Joe Random User I suggest the following: > > - find someone who is willing to re-implement sysutils/portupgrade > in a language present in the base system (i.e. _not_ in Perl). > Then > > - fix the dependency handling whithin the pkg_* tools resp. > the ports framework. This will make sysutils/portupgrade > hopefully obsolete. > > - After this has been done, start to think about a new flashy > package format hich has all the bells and whistles that are > missing today. > >The whole discussion I read so far seems to do the second or >even the third step before the first. Portupgrade has been improving rapidly over the last year or so, and that's been because we were lucky enough to have someone who was interested in making continuous improvements to it. I can think of areas where it could use more improvement, so that is what I comment on. The fact that it is written in ruby has not caused me any problems so far, so I do not care about that aspect of it. I guess what I'm saying is that the above priority list is your priority list. I want to talk about "step 2" first, because it is not "step 2" on my priority list, it is "step 1". The fact that so few people are talking about your "step 1" is merely a strong hint that most people do not have your list of priorities. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p0511170cb9579c8bdff1>