From owner-freebsd-pkg@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 16 16:57:42 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6155411; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:57:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail938c35.carrierzone.com (mail938c35.nsolutionszone.com [209.235.152.128]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57D7D1292; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:57:41 +0000 (UTC) X-POP-User: dlt.mebtel.net Received: from localhost (99-194-28-143.dyn.centurytel.net [99.194.28.143]) by mail938c35.carrierzone.com (8.13.6/8.13.1) with ESMTP id rBGG2JH2009411; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:02:20 GMT Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 11:02:18 -0500 From: Derek Tattersall To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: pkg-1.2.4 installation fails with Bus Error Message-ID: <20131216160218.GA13698@oriental.arm.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) X-CSC: 0 X-CHA: v=1.1 cv=Ea4kIZs8/1zRhPmsWXNAeR9CmJCTsLuvYu7jOXL4Apo= c=1 sm=1 a=BTUk5m_ZKwEA:10 a=2EpKpf8PMtEA:10 a=P2oOn6vrs4wA:10 a=GPr01A5e9VcA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=IcaekXDbmfGgJsrWNwHfZw==:17 a=xwPayol1AAAA:8 a=CjxXgO3LAAAA:8 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=-DuyJvINeU1S2WQGhM8A:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=0Ob1RWNGeVAA:10 a=rC2wZJ5BpNYA:10 a=MSl-tDqOz04A:10 a=MbAE6hs-0KMA:10 a=wwH4U-CmizkA:10 a=M4DE-qJyeaEA:10 a=IcaekXDbmfGgJsrWNwHfZw==:117 X-CTCH-Spam: Unknown X-CTCH-RefID: str=0001.0A020208.52AF240C.0140, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0 Cc: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list Reply-To: dlt@mebtel.net List-Id: Binary package management and package tools discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 16:57:42 -0000 Installation of pkg-1.2.4 fails on Stable 10 and Stable 9.2 with a Bus Error. This leaves the system with no means of dealing with other packages. -- Best regards, Derek Tattersall dlt@mebtel.net dlt666@yahoo.com dtatters@gmail.com From owner-freebsd-pkg@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 16 17:00:09 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B886B528; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 17:00:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-x22b.google.com (mail-wi0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22b]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 297D712B9; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 17:00:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f171.google.com with SMTP id bz8so2441489wib.10 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 09:00:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=OQMKmK6TxqFh9ea3S6mhfSoMEDQrenabzhYqMrFWNJA=; b=ZQCo98zaT0dYfmxDUQN2VgY/eP1SrwW0cW+P/z0va9WyzWw0Phz9lf1ply5La0/8fB GG5/1KAquzJ+K9zIPkg1VYgPcIJzD6OPjq3uD4MDOP8QBTm2mfuC/w29xwgnL3ew7JUP ZyhPKolcayYYjDwNPmFgXkjeXze1xvwZW5XG4al+deqNZ+ttstMHjYawRIpx+RqRvveO Vqs0E0Gdm5WX6lo40BcspekUzjYCUsaIxTVZP7IIs4ZspbAZY1HGM0Jafb6M0faoq0Pi WDXwjopznnOn/tpDirCBA57TBLc6CodASCRbkmMsoMRS7Zvgqolr9goJWLuTgUnROqPQ fYOg== X-Received: by 10.180.74.45 with SMTP id q13mr14275622wiv.47.1387213207504; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 09:00:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from ithaqua.etoilebsd.net (ithaqua.etoilebsd.net. [37.59.37.188]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id x4sm27514764wif.0.2013.12.16.09.00.01 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 16 Dec 2013 09:00:05 -0800 (PST) Sender: Baptiste Daroussin Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 17:59:56 +0100 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: Derek Tattersall Subject: Re: pkg-1.2.4 installation fails with Bus Error Message-ID: <20131216165956.GB99753@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> References: <20131216160218.GA13698@oriental.arm.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="cvVnyQ+4j833TQvp" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131216160218.GA13698@oriental.arm.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Binary package management and package tools discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 17:00:09 -0000 --cvVnyQ+4j833TQvp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 11:02:18AM -0500, Derek Tattersall wrote: > Installation of pkg-1.2.4 fails on Stable 10 and Stable 9.2 with a Bus > Error. This leaves the system with no means of dealing with other > packages. This has been fixed already, to avoid the bus error while trying to update to pkg 1.2.4_1 you will need to move your pkg.conf temportary to pkg doesn't see any pkg.conf. Sorry about that, regards, Bapt --cvVnyQ+4j833TQvp Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlKvMYwACgkQ8kTtMUmk6ExCDgCgr9P1Svzw1re+moh3QewDUUyw YccAnRhKELbedphHMxNpogIS8SRSJw4i =pc1h -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --cvVnyQ+4j833TQvp-- From owner-freebsd-pkg@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 18 00:14:12 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: pkg@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC303CA3; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 00:14:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from n.highsecure.ru (unknown [IPv6:2001:41d0:8:dd9a:e55b:676:2f:dcae]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 729B91B1D; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 00:14:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.126.169] (global-2-1.nat.csx.cam.ac.uk [131.111.185.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: vsevolod@highsecure.ru) by n.highsecure.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 805122209C6; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 00:12:12 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <52B0E8B8.4030506@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 00:13:44 +0000 From: Vsevolod Stakhov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130510 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: pkg@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: ruBSD 2013 pkg talk report Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Binary package management and package tools discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 00:14:12 -0000 Hello, I'd like to summarize the feedback I've received from pkg users during that event. I got many questions about ports and packages and I think that questions are useful for the overall pkg development. The most of questions were related to options and base system: Q: What if I have a package built from ports with some custom options and a repository has newer package but with different set of options? A: I proposed to skip updating such a package from binary repo, but initiate its building from ports directly (assuming that ports uses pkg for dependency/conflicts resolving). That sounds reasonable and seems to be very convenient for an end user. Q: What if I have a system with some build options that are not compatible with binary packages, e.g. DISABLE_IPV6. A: I think it is useful to have a special metafile for each repo that describes compatible systems, including not merely ABI, but a specific set of non-compatible options. The alternative is to create virtual base system packages (e.g. kernel-noipv6), that may be placed in the dependencies list. Q: What if I have my own custom repo that has older software but with my local patches. A: I suggested to assign a priority to each repo and never replace packages from a high priority repo by packages from low priority repo. That should fix this request. Q: What about portupgrade and other related tools? A: I claimed that these tools are going to be deprecated and packages will be managed from pkg even if you want to build a custom package from the sources. Q: Why have you chosen SAT and not X/Y or Z? A: SAT provides mathematically proved basis for the whole problem and it is much simpler to extend some proved base than to invent the wheel trying to solve the specific problem. Q: Why haven't you chosen other solutions? A: We have 28K ports and it is literally impossible to adopt each port to some external system. Therefore we plan to migrate to the new world smoothly by adding new features to SAT algorithm. Q: It seems that all these improvements are only in development or projected state. A: Indeed, many of these features are not yet implemented. Unfortunately, pkg system requires more developers than there is now and we appreciate any help in improving pkg to make our packages system better :) -- Vsevolod Stakhov From owner-freebsd-pkg@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 18 17:26:16 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5284F60; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 17:26:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtprelay05.ispgateway.de (smtprelay05.ispgateway.de [80.67.31.98]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 344E011EC; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 17:26:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [89.182.5.16] (helo=localhost) by smtprelay05.ispgateway.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1VtKsv-0000Df-Jf; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 18:26:13 +0100 Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 18:26:13 +0100 From: Marcus von Appen To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org, ports-announce@freebsd.org Subject: [HEADS UP] lang/python removed as implicit port dependency Message-ID: <20131218172613.GA1419@medusa.sysfault.org> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org, ports-announce@freebsd.org, freebsd-python@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="BOKacYhQ+x31HxR3" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) X-Df-Sender: MTEyNTc0Mg== Cc: freebsd-python@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list Reply-To: Marcus von Appen List-Id: Binary package management and package tools discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 17:26:16 -0000 --BOKacYhQ+x31HxR3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On behalf of the FreeBSD python team, I'd like to announce that the lang/python port has been removed as an implicit port dependency for ports using USE_PYTHON, USE_PYTHON_BUILD and USE_PYTHON_RUN in revision 336850. Why? The removal is necessary to bring us a step closer to building and installing ports for multiple python versions at the same time. What does that mean for port users? If you are using the ports tree to build your own ports from scratch, propably not much. Chances are high that lang/python was installed earlier, either as dependency or directly by you. In that case, it is very unlikely that you will run into any trouble with the change and hence you should not need to do anything in special. What does that mean for pkg users? If you are using pkg or are running your own pkg build server (e.g. via poudriere), it might happen that the one or other port breaks, since it cannot find the 'python' command or something else, which is installed by lang/python. We tried our best to keep the breakage as low as possible, but with more than 24000 ports to test and endless OPTION combinations, this is an impossible task. Please accept our apologies for your inconvenience and let us know about that misbehaviour by submitting a PR. If you are not a port maintainer, committer or developer, you can stop reading now. What about maintainers and port developers? Please read the CHANGES. Keep the direct usage of lang/python within BUILD_ and RUN_DEPENDS as low as possible. Using lang/python as dependency will complicate package building for different python versions (due to the PACKAGE_DEPENDS_ONLY knob). Ports should refer to a specific python version, version range or a version meta port (lang/python2 or lang/python3) instead. USE_PYTHON=yes and friends will only pull in the default python version now (e.g. lang/python27 or whatever is configured via DEFAULT_VERSIONS), so test your port thoroughly for (a possibly) incorrect usage of the 'python' command. Cheers Marcus --BOKacYhQ+x31HxR3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlKx2rUACgkQi68/ErJnpkdpKQCgnnNFl4VAJ6YqTTk2rnwAHj6K RW8An1i3gMXAGbg2v1i+mXHjgqBv24K8 =V6Rq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --BOKacYhQ+x31HxR3-- From owner-freebsd-pkg@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 19 03:33:00 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A13D73EF; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 03:33:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-la0-x231.google.com (mail-la0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67D021367; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 03:32:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-la0-f49.google.com with SMTP id er20so204346lab.22 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 19:32:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=qIY4lMtnJY37PaZACFU9cQqGrx1T1ZQl7WTx8vgFQ7Y=; b=LngRZUHuujCHgqmGUoJWcxzASXzZnIYzPc+CIecExW7rNFMBQBvPfPq8ODms3RlWRQ bP6uve18/UmVwwHSXAphcA1TcyfmsjYnCMP0+qp06GFdKo56vdVlauzQ2I8HEf6i+F5u lNY1OBnrP/fruyTdqfA26AxFlQNQH9squkJzT0qoIn3UiV8rGUQe19mBg7jkqYYUdImy 3DeFD0X8HUI05ZMiMsX2sv4U8azcQEbo6K4zdU18Z+H2pP03M1GdSlexJqNDUjFY8Yyp qFkT/B254eVjx6at9SbyMJYri5gbjJQ1arxPN1QwGb/3zfowrzS0jnCyUvXYn6Pogzu5 MUWw== X-Received: by 10.152.2.5 with SMTP id 5mr12702408laq.21.1387423977333; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 19:32:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.20] ([176.193.35.103]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ox6sm1347271lbb.6.2013.12.18.19.32.56 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 18 Dec 2013 19:32:56 -0800 (PST) Sender: Dmitry Sivachenko Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) Subject: Re: [HEADS UP] lang/python removed as implicit port dependency From: Dmitry Sivachenko In-Reply-To: <20131218172613.GA1419@medusa.sysfault.org> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 07:32:54 +0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20131218172613.GA1419@medusa.sysfault.org> To: Marcus von Appen X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) Cc: ports-announce@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, "freebsd-python@FreeBSD.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Binary package management and package tools discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 03:33:00 -0000 On 18 =D0=B4=D0=B5=D0=BA. 2013 =D0=B3., at 21:26, Marcus von Appen = wrote: > On behalf of the FreeBSD python team, I'd like to announce that the > lang/python port has been removed as an implicit port dependency for > ports using USE_PYTHON, USE_PYTHON_BUILD and USE_PYTHON_RUN in = revision > 336850. >=20 Finally! Thanks a lot for your work.= From owner-freebsd-pkg@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 19 07:32:27 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52E81A82; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 07:32:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pb0-x234.google.com (mail-pb0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 072ED13D1; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 07:32:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pb0-f52.google.com with SMTP id uo5so792361pbc.11 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 23:32:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XQ3QqkAr7diuN2kDpG6507gDnkp5XrED0lkFy2BeMCY=; b=vtIxcWrdYBOIS9VNEjA+UrZaX4ALqH4gZrav5C1LPkmkHZ5LErWPR4sibu251LA5gN /zO9RBVTMsba1nl1z19jjrSX7UzynuT8bAODg6CYuyuyNSR/y6Oe/iVoiaLZX95LEqNg JaBjX9MIErt3g+UxU+5sekj+tZPEEoqk3eFj95lfiWg+vjonYJP6QRX3NurHCa+hjteW PuSJPFq9LYc8qih/wk1a5gp4BOJcEpUDu+6umUIl3unyWawiLz0S/LO7WgPXVq07VHTL K5SQ3TBrDDnM0eCTYNDVD/R/vcqrk45FlqQM/02CqR/1zBo/Kd08aI2Q3NEuIZXFk8P5 buLQ== X-Received: by 10.68.179.35 with SMTP id dd3mr7265pbc.138.1387438346407; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 23:32:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.7] (ppp59-167-128-11.static.internode.on.net. [59.167.128.11]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id gv10sm5029294pbd.0.2013.12.18.23.32.23 for (version=TLSv1.1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 18 Dec 2013 23:32:25 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <52B2A101.3050609@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 18:32:17 +1100 From: Kubilay Kocak User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:26.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/26.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marcus von Appen , William Grzybowski Subject: Re: [HEADS UP] lang/python removed as implicit port dependency References: <20131218172613.GA1419@medusa.sysfault.org> In-Reply-To: <20131218172613.GA1419@medusa.sysfault.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ports-announce@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, freebsd-python@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list Reply-To: koobs@FreeBSD.org List-Id: Binary package management and package tools discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 07:32:27 -0000 On 19/12/2013 4:26 AM, Marcus von Appen wrote: > On behalf of the FreeBSD python team, I'd like to announce that the > lang/python port has been removed as an implicit port dependency for > ports using USE_PYTHON, USE_PYTHON_BUILD and USE_PYTHON_RUN in revision > 336850. > > Why? > > The removal is necessary to bring us a step closer to building and > installing ports for multiple python versions at the same time. > > What does that mean for port users? > > If you are using the ports tree to build your own ports from scratch, > propably not much. Chances are high that lang/python was installed > earlier, either as dependency or directly by you. In that case, it is > very unlikely that you will run into any trouble with the change and > hence you should not need to do anything in special. > > What does that mean for pkg users? > > If you are using pkg or are running your own pkg build server > (e.g. via poudriere), it might happen that the one or other port > breaks, since it cannot find the 'python' command or something > else, which is installed by lang/python. > > We tried our best to keep the breakage as low as possible, but with > more than 24000 ports to test and endless OPTION combinations, this is > an impossible task. Please accept our apologies for your inconvenience > and let us know about that misbehaviour by submitting a PR. > > If you are not a port maintainer, committer or developer, you can stop > reading now. > > What about maintainers and port developers? > > Please read the CHANGES. Keep the direct usage of lang/python within > BUILD_ and RUN_DEPENDS as low as possible. Using lang/python as > dependency will complicate package building for different python > versions (due to the PACKAGE_DEPENDS_ONLY knob). Ports should refer to > a specific python version, version range or a version meta port > (lang/python2 or lang/python3) instead. > > USE_PYTHON=yes and friends will only pull in the default python > version now (e.g. lang/python27 or whatever is configured via > DEFAULT_VERSIONS), so test your port thoroughly for (a possibly) > incorrect usage of the 'python' command. > > Cheers > Marcus > I'd just like to let everyone know just how laborious this body of work was, and say that the degree to which it was a success and seamless is a testament to Marcus' commitment and tenacity. Among other Big Hairy Audacious Goal's the Python@ team has kicked in the past two quarters, this and the move to setuptools install led by William (wg@) deserve special recognition. So *thank you* both, on behalf of every FreeBSD/Python user, developer and administrator who is set to benefit from your efforts. Stand out work :) Koobs From owner-freebsd-pkg@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 19 11:19:08 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: pkg@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9C696DE; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 11:19:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-x22d.google.com (mail-wi0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22d]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B42A9150B; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 11:19:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f173.google.com with SMTP id hn9so2025919wib.6 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 03:19:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=moc+bpDU2joQPaAissxl9bOnYFtoLOmiCyAvx3/Xh2w=; b=fK2f6xdQ7BDgtMxWWm/3u7mKuvIfF0wlh7O94ZFVHZVfKrfKv2ZhoFb+Id+C2FUA97 h6bu7bBqQoJjd/E6BVx1CjHmQiI6G2ki+UXL6z5QbNdjN3E+KdG1MP/9L/VWZ8VeoR0q GQF0KTdQ2qKAeGzyZQqQaKn3OZQi8+QbOY48awF2TWid39QyRcgD+g8FPB7JZyUNlJs/ r7/eZPEg/WoZQqLcExeUvrict24mTvRJCZ7npme1fiSscxWD8E1PhpXSpMQFR/PK/O/8 ZKd0QhUiyyYv+Unlet5+M01Bxmwz/2cWOD0seR4aIVupa9CifQJCkxY2j5Y7CurbqhC4 r0cQ== X-Received: by 10.180.189.106 with SMTP id gh10mr2331465wic.18.1387451943135; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 03:19:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from ithaqua.etoilebsd.net (ithaqua.etoilebsd.net. [37.59.37.188]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id bc5sm8260963wib.4.2013.12.19.03.19.01 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 19 Dec 2013 03:19:02 -0800 (PST) Sender: Baptiste Daroussin Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 12:19:00 +0100 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: Vsevolod Stakhov Subject: Re: ruBSD 2013 pkg talk report Message-ID: <20131219111900.GB11355@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> References: <52B0E8B8.4030506@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="neYutvxvOLaeuPCA" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52B0E8B8.4030506@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: pkg@FreeBSD.org, ports@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Binary package management and package tools discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 11:19:09 -0000 --neYutvxvOLaeuPCA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:13:44AM +0000, Vsevolod Stakhov wrote: > Hello, >=20 > I'd like to summarize the feedback I've received from pkg users during > that event. I got many questions about ports and packages and I think > that questions are useful for the overall pkg development. First thank you for having given that presentation and for this feedback! >=20 > The most of questions were related to options and base system: >=20 > Q: What if I have a package built from ports with some custom options > and a repository has newer package but with different set of options? > A: I proposed to skip updating such a package from binary repo, but > initiate its building from ports directly (assuming that ports uses pkg > for dependency/conflicts resolving). That sounds reasonable and seems to > be very convenient for an end user. Right now I would recommand to pkg lock the said package. The other solution would be to create a home made repository and say to pkg= that the said package can only be upgraded from that repository. The other solution would be to extend the plugin system of pkg to get pluga= ble repository system and create a portstree plugin that build directory the po= rts to update it, and will respect pkg annotate -A repository but this depends = on the ports using pkg for dependency/conflict resolution and that will be qui= te tough to do. >=20 > Q: What if I have a system with some build options that are not > compatible with binary packages, e.g. DISABLE_IPV6. > A: I think it is useful to have a special metafile for each repo that > describes compatible systems, including not merely ABI, but a specific > set of non-compatible options. The alternative is to create virtual base > system packages (e.g. kernel-noipv6), that may be placed in the > dependencies list. the useful things would be to extend imho the system to depend on symbols being able to create smart provides (based on symbols) and smart requires (need a libbla.so with (bla_ipv6 function) this is doable but toug= h as well (any idea welcome here) >=20 > Q: What if I have my own custom repo that has older software but with my > local patches. > A: I suggested to assign a priority to each repo and never replace > packages from a high priority repo by packages from low priority repo. > That should fix this request. We need priorities, we do not have it yet, beside that you can use pkg anno= tate -A repository to say a package can only be upgraded from a given repository. >=20 > Q: What about portupgrade and other related tools? > A: I claimed that these tools are going to be deprecated and packages > will be managed from pkg even if you want to build a custom package from > the sources. I agree with that beside pkg will never know directly how to build from the ports tree, but a plugin can do it. (pkg should remain package building sys= tem agnostic) >=20 > Q: Why have you chosen SAT and not X/Y or Z? > A: SAT provides mathematically proved basis for the whole problem and it > is much simpler to extend some proved base than to invent the wheel > trying to solve the specific problem. +1 >=20 > Q: Why haven't you chosen other solutions? > A: We have 28K ports and it is literally impossible to adopt each port > to some external system. Therefore we plan to migrate to the new world > smoothly by adding new features to SAT algorithm. +1 >=20 > Q: It seems that all these improvements are only in development or > projected state. > A: Indeed, many of these features are not yet implemented. > Unfortunately, pkg system requires more developers than there is now and > we appreciate any help in improving pkg to make our packages system > better :) >=20 +10000 I would like to add here that lots of things like vsevolod's sat solver are tough to incorporate because we first need to workaround (and fix) lots of problem in the ports tree, he has done a really fantastic work on the solve= r we really need it, but to go in that direction we will need to: 1 fix https://wiki.freebsd.org/ports/PkgNameCollisions 2 face a very complicated migration from ORIGIN to pkgname and unique ident= ifier internally. The choice to continue with the ports tree was a good and reaso= nable choice, but it also have a huge price. regards, Bapt --neYutvxvOLaeuPCA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlKy1iQACgkQ8kTtMUmk6EzVKwCdG9oTRWQe6LsC9q5/5+7AZGUo x9cAnR6xIlIk8fWHrY17+EBdxpDYeNlV =4Szm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --neYutvxvOLaeuPCA-- From owner-freebsd-pkg@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 19 11:37:46 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: pkg@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AAFC7D35; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 11:37:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from n.highsecure.ru (unknown [IPv6:2001:41d0:8:dd9a:6427:7330:9d5d:3fbd]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A2CD1672; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 11:37:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from medway.cl.cam.ac.uk (medway.cl.cam.ac.uk [128.232.64.24]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: vsevolod@highsecure.ru) by n.highsecure.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B4229220136; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 11:35:56 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <52B2DA88.6040803@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 11:37:44 +0000 From: Vsevolod Stakhov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Baptiste Daroussin Subject: Re: ruBSD 2013 pkg talk report References: <52B0E8B8.4030506@FreeBSD.org> <20131219111900.GB11355@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> In-Reply-To: <20131219111900.GB11355@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: pkg@FreeBSD.org, ports@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Binary package management and package tools discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 11:37:46 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 19/12/13 11:19, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:13:44AM +0000, Vsevolod Stakhov wrote: >> Hello, >> Q: What if I have a package built from ports with some custom >> options and a repository has newer package but with different set >> of options? A: I proposed to skip updating such a package from >> binary repo, but initiate its building from ports directly >> (assuming that ports uses pkg for dependency/conflicts >> resolving). That sounds reasonable and seems to be very >> convenient for an end user. > > Right now I would recommand to pkg lock the said package. The other > solution would be to create a home made repository and say to pkg > that the said package can only be upgraded from that repository. > > The other solution would be to extend the plugin system of pkg to > get plugable repository system and create a portstree plugin that > build directory the ports to update it, and will respect pkg > annotate -A repository but this depends on the ports using pkg for > dependency/conflict resolution and that will be quite tough to do. I still think that this functionality should be essential for pkg. For example, I've built vim package with motiff, and I have no chance to upgrade it from pkg repo. Hence, the proper choice is to let ports to do this stuff (since we plan ports to use pkg solver for dependencies resolution). Certainly, we should not stick to /usr/ports and make being hardcoded, but this should be provided out of the box for FreeBSD. >> >> Q: What if I have a system with some build options that are not >> compatible with binary packages, e.g. DISABLE_IPV6. A: I think it >> is useful to have a special metafile for each repo that describes >> compatible systems, including not merely ABI, but a specific set >> of non-compatible options. The alternative is to create virtual >> base system packages (e.g. kernel-noipv6), that may be placed in >> the dependencies list. > > the useful things would be to extend imho the system to depend on > symbols being able to create smart provides (based on symbols) and > smart requires (need a libbla.so with (bla_ipv6 function) this is > doable but tough as well (any idea welcome here) It is very, very dangerous way to do it in this way. Remember all those dlopen and LD_PRELOAD stuff which would definitely break everything. From my sense, the base system and kernel should generate virtual packages that contains specific options. Then we may deal with them in an ordinary way. >> >> Q: What if I have my own custom repo that has older software but >> with my local patches. A: I suggested to assign a priority to >> each repo and never replace packages from a high priority repo by >> packages from low priority repo. That should fix this request. > > We need priorities, we do not have it yet, beside that you can use > pkg annotate -A repository to say a package can only be upgraded > from a given repository. > >> >> Q: What about portupgrade and other related tools? A: I claimed >> that these tools are going to be deprecated and packages will be >> managed from pkg even if you want to build a custom package from >> the sources. > > I agree with that beside pkg will never know directly how to build > from the ports tree, but a plugin can do it. (pkg should remain > package building system agnostic) See above: I think that pkg should have some abstract build system interface with plugins to concrete ones. >> >> Q: Why have you chosen SAT and not X/Y or Z? A: SAT provides >> mathematically proved basis for the whole problem and it is much >> simpler to extend some proved base than to invent the wheel >> trying to solve the specific problem. > > +1 >> >> Q: Why haven't you chosen other solutions? A: We have 28K ports >> and it is literally impossible to adopt each port to some >> external system. Therefore we plan to migrate to the new world >> smoothly by adding new features to SAT algorithm. > > +1 >> >> Q: It seems that all these improvements are only in development >> or projected state. A: Indeed, many of these features are not yet >> implemented. Unfortunately, pkg system requires more developers >> than there is now and we appreciate any help in improving pkg to >> make our packages system better :) >> > +10000 > > I would like to add here that lots of things like vsevolod's sat > solver are tough to incorporate because we first need to workaround > (and fix) lots of problem in the ports tree, he has done a really > fantastic work on the solver we really need it, but to go in that > direction we will need to: 1 fix > https://wiki.freebsd.org/ports/PkgNameCollisions 2 face a very > complicated migration from ORIGIN to pkgname and unique identifier > internally. The choice to continue with the ports tree was a good > and reasonable choice, but it also have a huge price. Actually, my solver uses origins as well at the moment. So if pkgname conversion is too though then we may try to start with the solver merging (which is a complicated task anyway). - -- Vsevolod Stakhov -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSstqHAAoJEAdke2eQCBQ3RWwQAIy4+ihvEBbwusa0tDzbdCuu /xBQV7Or+7aq90V7QRGilC4tT+QU3cfl3ux1/62IpXKc9EGct91qANXUeuPlxi3W 0inemjiLfG7+pSxOiNJinH17g0lP9o+go4xHyHzf1syb5r0YszC+47qzei8mwNGQ uQlIyyrT2SBtYUirw64buheArPQAFEKItegpdV1Vgec+/Ss6aSJ/gtkvBMjVudm6 kxpXOWwd6AkwfYoFJOMsZ5c0nE3YmYnexUzpXMh6pv6HedT/3EcY5UBo7O+IZkuF +FU4DKun81ro/jDpisHEl2Re8DEEhtKQ4JkHU45YvQQCsyn7cUMkf+uhOY+5Oro7 +hhr/pXsf3paY7CJtf+2V+S4nzppyE7XvWmzV5JphC/FTaT2M3cSnrhvw6oIH8KO DAUB67srFtdg9TR6Sb9E9grH22ANKma0Jcx9hl88YJe5zVu5MeVP4991WBr6UrvO zhybKvYuqn5N4fIfxqicrvWXnB8wIBDlcW/qfxOEGZc0Jtm7RtAsHRNPEoGym3ag HNjzVuQKhdCOen2l13BhxvXSeRPlH5DWMPTaZrhIe1nOOS3B6HsCwiu4a31gvjtZ VjQ4+hhQkQ0d4GZgq66/DmxjvN4uO8QEk/iB5h2TBsur1tcDJcSe2pWFT6ByUoiM cVxvNxGwGoypUSgD8RUK =aF+U -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From owner-freebsd-pkg@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 19 19:17:45 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: pkg@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 28315917 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:17:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from secure.xzibition.com (secure.xzibition.com [173.160.118.92]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CFCE01F77 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:17:44 +0000 (UTC) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=shatow.net; h=message-id :date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sweb; b=g8cgYu JFP9Tn6EdSHuB17p7VX3Bg7y9W2Z9Fg38qBuUNzmH3HK6rjbOu7SinycaZJi/bap UwgMArWMYi4hIeiCWnOAT81m8e8mpcoqfdewRe8gAOBPYgmHlI/EM8gToU+mcrsG w7P7tNg/vCIiDR3KHe2MajTEMBil/esj9WQmY= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=shatow.net; h=message-id :date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sweb; bh=b3PzDgQHV8fv WJlLZTGb1cmdJ2kre1E6HwyyXMNcP2I=; b=GRUg8SYUPlqOlZh+dbz3HmEwSlcC t4UCsyiWe5NdN5bumiMdWXTfMUSbj4YOxN5xZf5+RSiCvNOa+f/Nephe8SKAmjO3 6xPtqHOUXtbj1R46m70Gs2tndPwniAmCPpi429SvgwM4iE+THgiPglhlXlBU1mXS FI4br8jc4MAignw= Received: (qmail 60752 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2013 13:11:01 -0600 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.10.0.24?) (bryan@shatow.net@10.10.0.24) by sweb.xzibition.com with ESMTPA; 19 Dec 2013 13:11:01 -0600 Message-ID: <52B344C1.80304@shatow.net> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 13:10:57 -0600 From: Bryan Drewery User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vsevolod Stakhov , pkg@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ruBSD 2013 pkg talk report References: <52B0E8B8.4030506@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <52B0E8B8.4030506@FreeBSD.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 OpenPGP: id=3C9B0CF9; url=http://www.shatow.net/bryan/bryan.asc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Binary package management and package tools discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:17:45 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 12/17/2013 6:13 PM, Vsevolod Stakhov wrote: > Hello, > > I'd like to summarize the feedback I've received from pkg users > during that event. I got many questions about ports and packages > and I think that questions are useful for the overall pkg > development. > > The most of questions were related to options and base system: > > Q: What if I have a package built from ports with some custom > options and a repository has newer package but with different set > of options? A: I proposed to skip updating such a package from > binary repo, but initiate its building from ports directly > (assuming that ports uses pkg for dependency/conflicts resolving). > That sounds reasonable and seems to be very convenient for an end > user. > > Q: What if I have a system with some build options that are not > compatible with binary packages, e.g. DISABLE_IPV6. A: I think it > is useful to have a special metafile for each repo that describes > compatible systems, including not merely ABI, but a specific set of > non-compatible options. The alternative is to create virtual base > system packages (e.g. kernel-noipv6), that may be placed in the > dependencies list. > > Q: What if I have my own custom repo that has older software but > with my local patches. A: I suggested to assign a priority to each > repo and never replace packages from a high priority repo by > packages from low priority repo. That should fix this request. > > Q: What about portupgrade and other related tools? A: I claimed > that these tools are going to be deprecated and packages will be > managed from pkg even if you want to build a custom package from > the sources. These tools are not deprecated for port building. portupgrade and portmaster will live on. They are port building tools. pkg is not. These are only no longer intended to be used to install packages. > > Q: Why have you chosen SAT and not X/Y or Z? A: SAT provides > mathematically proved basis for the whole problem and it is much > simpler to extend some proved base than to invent the wheel trying > to solve the specific problem. > > Q: Why haven't you chosen other solutions? A: We have 28K ports and > it is literally impossible to adopt each port to some external > system. Therefore we plan to migrate to the new world smoothly by > adding new features to SAT algorithm. > > Q: It seems that all these improvements are only in development or > projected state. A: Indeed, many of these features are not yet > implemented. Unfortunately, pkg system requires more developers > than there is now and we appreciate any help in improving pkg to > make our packages system better :) > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSs0TBAAoJEG54KsA8mwz5wqsP/iNP1/+Hr6hD+N/fUuwvTH/h nJCn2AaaAN0dEvF74I74+iyZGjlE8mZ2owVudJ72mZBnnITor1n4hDZJyQLY/tWI qGMqcvjQe9O9x5fl4GXVo+50OoEphowlYRX81KZLIq7b+6l9fLRvk/EoWbWqLZNN p4FHQEKJa22GwZ74a5E6zlQpeGCj1OZrXcnB4fJv9eBfqTFrCbgKq5wP0AShJnsF fYmKQS9De8jt2i9daSAyH3RgsLd4e4rwS/ulurrIN07qHq0ou/OYzew1v24miOb5 PoOQY3LihKvmTOJO7FBEKpdzoN/8XJdf5Q1zsNEgUzYwKWJhZvwz1SKUybh+GoK1 c3LCK78KJrj/tR6kzLpDs1Hc7kJwAgVf5GFdmPQDY9M7ZBIRF3RKcbmmS3ZQbSko yAf+ErsmxuWgZyVIT5WdZDEg5CTqCbObIAJdL4oGOfq6EYEJV3cfm3g+bEQxqC0e aPKDIuy2MjRoHwG6U26ykkK9KQmEncq73QP7262EcZgCInBvcLiyrRRAAYeB4fbB 0ambtgrGvlD7Dunrf9lcOp+puEohIFCCUqE3yWimCuF+X8X0k2kLevH+tJz4536E vVTVwlp1aUTM6MJuvYEf64Qr55NWg4TKbFTybmhQbuB3rL6X/AE3zYr2d9vTw5wO Hh9Sd6HFXaEyxDJq3kHC =c/6+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From owner-freebsd-pkg@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 19 19:53:11 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: pkg@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0911896E; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:53:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from n.highsecure.ru (n.highsecure.ru [178.32.219.154]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C266712E9; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:53:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.126.169] (global-2-1.nat.csx.cam.ac.uk [131.111.185.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: vsevolod@highsecure.ru) by n.highsecure.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 83EE62209C6; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:51:14 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <52B34E96.5010301@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:52:54 +0000 From: Vsevolod Stakhov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130510 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bryan Drewery Subject: Re: ruBSD 2013 pkg talk report References: <52B0E8B8.4030506@FreeBSD.org> <52B344C1.80304@shatow.net> In-Reply-To: <52B344C1.80304@shatow.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: pkg@FreeBSD.org, ports@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Binary package management and package tools discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:53:11 -0000 On 19/12/13 19:10, Bryan Drewery wrote: > On 12/17/2013 6:13 PM, Vsevolod Stakhov wrote: >> Hello, > >> I'd like to summarize the feedback I've received from pkg users >> during that event. I got many questions about ports and packages >> and I think that questions are useful for the overall pkg >> development. > >> The most of questions were related to options and base system: > >> Q: What if I have a package built from ports with some custom >> options and a repository has newer package but with different set >> of options? A: I proposed to skip updating such a package from >> binary repo, but initiate its building from ports directly >> (assuming that ports uses pkg for dependency/conflicts resolving). >> That sounds reasonable and seems to be very convenient for an end >> user. > >> Q: What if I have a system with some build options that are not >> compatible with binary packages, e.g. DISABLE_IPV6. A: I think it >> is useful to have a special metafile for each repo that describes >> compatible systems, including not merely ABI, but a specific set of >> non-compatible options. The alternative is to create virtual base >> system packages (e.g. kernel-noipv6), that may be placed in the >> dependencies list. > >> Q: What if I have my own custom repo that has older software but >> with my local patches. A: I suggested to assign a priority to each >> repo and never replace packages from a high priority repo by >> packages from low priority repo. That should fix this request. > >> Q: What about portupgrade and other related tools? A: I claimed >> that these tools are going to be deprecated and packages will be >> managed from pkg even if you want to build a custom package from >> the sources. > > These tools are not deprecated for port building. portupgrade and > portmaster will live on. They are port building tools. pkg is not. > These are only no longer intended to be used to install packages. Well, considering that we plan to use pkg for dependencies and conflicts resolving what's the real purpose of having 3 alternative systems of ports management? I really have no understanding why do we want to complicate things that are already complicated? >From the point of view of a normal user, I may tell that everything I want is to have an ability to manage packages and ports transparently. Look at the macports, their user shell is perfect: you have no difference between building software from sources and getting it from repository. However, you can use only source packages while the default behaviour is to choose binary packages. I'm not talking about the current situation when pkg cannot work with ports and source packages. But eventually we want to implement that feature and use pkg as the only solver for both ports and binary packages. In this situation I consider portupgrade and portmaster as a confusing evil: a user can easily break his system by improper usage of such tools. -- Vsevolod Stakhov From owner-freebsd-pkg@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 19 20:01:48 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: pkg@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B4FCC78; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 20:01:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from apnoea.adamw.org (apnoea.adamw.org [204.109.59.150]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0291F139A; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 20:01:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from apnoea.adamw.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by apnoea.adamw.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 78F1311F984; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 13:51:22 -0500 (EST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 13:51:22 -0500 From: Adam Weinberger To: Bryan Drewery Subject: Re: ruBSD 2013 pkg talk report In-Reply-To: <52B344C1.80304@shatow.net> References: <52B0E8B8.4030506@FreeBSD.org> <52B344C1.80304@shatow.net> Message-ID: X-Sender: adamw@adamw.org User-Agent: banemail fence Cc: pkg@freebsd.org, owner-ports-committers@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Binary package management and package tools discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 20:01:48 -0000 On 2013/12/19 14:10, Bryan Drewery wrote: > On 12/17/2013 6:13 PM, Vsevolod Stakhov wrote: >> Q: What about portupgrade and other related tools? A: I claimed >> that these tools are going to be deprecated and packages will be >> managed from pkg even if you want to build a custom package from >> the sources. > > These tools are not deprecated for port building. portupgrade and > portmaster will live on. They are port building tools. pkg is not. > These are only no longer intended to be used to install packages. This was one of my very first questions about pkgng, and in fact I was not 100% clear on this until your email here. That information would be really helpful to have on the wiki, and even in UPDATING. Too many entries (especially from the initial roll-out) say "all users should..." when it really means "all package-based users." The words "packages" and "ports" is just not clearly defined in the wiki pages, and I think it'd help to clarify them. It would be good to highlight that: * Building, installing and upgrading ports ("using make(1)") is exactly the same * pkgng DOES change how information about installed ports is stored * portmaster/portupgrade should no longer be used to manage packages ("binary distributions created from ports") # Adam --- Adam Weinberger adamw@adamw.org http://www.adamw.org