From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Sun Apr 17 01:28:16 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE8C8B0A1BA for ; Sun, 17 Apr 2016 01:28:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lifanov@mail.lifanov.com) Received: from mail.lifanov.com (mail.lifanov.com [206.125.175.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF1FC170D for ; Sun, 17 Apr 2016 01:28:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lifanov@mail.lifanov.com) Received: by mail.lifanov.com (Postfix, from userid 58) id 308F323943F; Sat, 16 Apr 2016 21:28:10 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on mail.lifanov.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,SHORTCIRCUIT shortcircuit=ham autolearn=disabled version=3.4.1 Received: from [25.181.231.10] (unknown [172.56.5.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.lifanov.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EE838239420 for ; Sat, 16 Apr 2016 21:28:07 -0400 (EDT) User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: snapshot package versioning From: Nikolai Lifanov Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2016 21:28:05 -0400 To: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Message-ID: <28E37AF4-571F-4662-A5F8-6E63B0302E39@mail.lifanov.com> X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2016 01:28:17 -0000 Hello, Can we remove the date from package versions please? The ${ABI} and revision describe which source was built and it's a bit odd that a package built before and after midnight has different versions. Another idea, if versions were in 0.s277777 format, pkg could seamlessly upgrade that to 11.0 (when it is released). - Nikolai Lifanov From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Sun Apr 17 01:41:48 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BEDDB0A737 for ; Sun, 17 Apr 2016 01:41:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E5F11EF6; Sun, 17 Apr 2016 01:41:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from FreeBSD.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39B091180; Sun, 17 Apr 2016 01:41:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2016 01:41:47 +0000 From: Glen Barber To: Nikolai Lifanov Cc: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Subject: Re: snapshot package versioning Message-ID: <20160417014147.GO1554@FreeBSD.org> References: <28E37AF4-571F-4662-A5F8-6E63B0302E39@mail.lifanov.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="GIP5y49pbaVPin6k" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <28E37AF4-571F-4662-A5F8-6E63B0302E39@mail.lifanov.com> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT amd64 X-SCUD-Definition: Sudden Completely Unexpected Dataloss X-SULE-Definition: Sudden Unexpected Learning Event X-PEKBAC-Definition: Problem Exists, Keyboard Between Admin/Computer User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2016 01:41:48 -0000 --GIP5y49pbaVPin6k Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 09:28:05PM -0400, Nikolai Lifanov wrote: > Hello, >=20 > Can we remove the date from package > versions please? The ${ABI} and revision > describe which source was built and it's > a bit odd that a package built before and > after midnight has different versions. >=20 > Another idea, if versions were in 0.s277777 > format, pkg could seamlessly upgrade that to > 11.0 (when it is released). >=20 The date was intentionally chosen for non-RELEASE builds. However, you can set PKG_VERSION however you want. If you want to use the revision, you can do this with: # make packages PKG_VERSION=3D`svn info --show-item last-changed-revision` Glen --GIP5y49pbaVPin6k Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXEunbAAoJEAMUWKVHj+KTr3QQAJFt0TTuLmCVV2Y9W9EAUyaE 61Ks8ovdUA+coU96KsgbASr7MOZLKcRuo8Wl6bldqb+f9LlPCSU2m+y7chNTJsN5 QKEcIYhfxlZj+LkHaoaVWqqP54iKTgNJFmZtgJR+eI6Kr3og9vX5/RmIVOcalm7D UmgpEeiJ9DCJNbZP9L0hEsG0+Hj5mgYwzuWSGgbDFSft2QRrVCNCMr9pq9i/jPkC wzusFbiRupD6hpl3neHXJ2JWGJkplS4YmYzj4HT1+K2H/I5KLy56jyrOFNJ84sSx ge599+EXxnY3KLL9gFKN5oPSQmAVzn9MSznMH/1+t6DqsS8RkkxNvN86yAuGEgl4 n/vzAgnQVyoxPyzjbYt8kZs3Z+AgOWAM+irKmXUB7qRHaFrvJXkHjh8PdzKrX8O5 KFhGGOYUrfxT3h3SYhxzKmEz56XGYDCznSXKHlCc4t2THzyfQA4LBVmfvJwfmDF+ /wVbExw4CvjQ4Aolx91kEVotmm6s5+8VjV1QBNDD7i/PJGe3GZ9FQ1mZaTT+w41C AbgrXVVYSQ8voR6+1Byo0LgxyIqg2e5W6qP+XYeHP3R55TDf18Xv9cagCU6Xh1sS DAyW2h7JrBAN6Wy4u+ZGOaBjUpP+z3DZHNR+nhHInbwA1zdui/TOTXBPBr51EVTh OOuNJCjBDlQvglKePQAN =sGCl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --GIP5y49pbaVPin6k-- From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Sun Apr 17 02:14:29 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A1DBB104A0 for ; Sun, 17 Apr 2016 02:14:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lifanov@mail.lifanov.com) Received: from mail.lifanov.com (mail.lifanov.com [206.125.175.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 296F41FFA; Sun, 17 Apr 2016 02:14:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lifanov@mail.lifanov.com) Received: by mail.lifanov.com (Postfix, from userid 58) id 39F5C23943F; Sat, 16 Apr 2016 22:14:28 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on mail.lifanov.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,SHORTCIRCUIT shortcircuit=ham autolearn=disabled version=3.4.1 Received: from [10.100.100.58] (unknown [107.15.95.58]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.lifanov.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6F419239420; Sat, 16 Apr 2016 22:14:27 -0400 (EDT) User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: <20160417014147.GO1554@FreeBSD.org> References: <28E37AF4-571F-4662-A5F8-6E63B0302E39@mail.lifanov.com> <20160417014147.GO1554@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: snapshot package versioning From: Nikolai Lifanov Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2016 22:14:22 -0400 To: Glen Barber CC: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Message-ID: <4600892A-7810-4605-95A0-DC0BC4840211@mail.lifanov.com> X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2016 02:14:29 -0000 On April 16, 2016 9:41:47 PM EDT, Glen Barber wrote: >On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 09:28:05PM -0400, Nikolai Lifanov wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Can we remove the date from package >> versions please? The ${ABI} and revision >> describe which source was built and it's >> a bit odd that a package built before and >> after midnight has different versions. >> >> Another idea, if versions were in 0.s277777 >> format, pkg could seamlessly upgrade that to >> 11.0 (when it is released). >> > >The date was intentionally chosen for non-RELEASE builds. However, you >can set PKG_VERSION however you want. > >If you want to use the revision, you can do this with: > ># make packages PKG_VERSION=`svn info --show-item >last-changed-revision` Awesome, thanks! This is what I was looking for. >Glen - Nikolai Lifanov From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 14:05:14 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E930EB124AE; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:05:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lifanov@mail.lifanov.com) Received: from mail.lifanov.com (mail.lifanov.com [206.125.175.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7F8E1E89; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:05:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lifanov@mail.lifanov.com) Received: by mail.lifanov.com (Postfix, from userid 58) id EEE6623943F; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 10:05:13 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on mail.lifanov.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,SHORTCIRCUIT shortcircuit=ham autolearn=disabled version=3.4.1 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (vnat600.ejoco.com [166.108.32.32]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.lifanov.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 60531239420; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 10:05:13 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: 11.0-RELEASE pkg base & base.txz file To: Ernie Luzar References: <5714E89A.8000807@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Nikolai Lifanov Message-ID: Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 10:05:12 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5714E89A.8000807@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:05:15 -0000 On 04/18/16 10:00, Ernie Luzar wrote: > 11.0 will have pkg base, thats ok, but what does than mean for the > base.txz file? > > It it going to stay as part of FBSD install? > > I have many scripts for creating jails which depend on the base.txz file. It's even easier now: # mkdir -p /usr/jails/new # pkg -r /usr/jails/new install -r base -g '*' - Nikolai Lifanov From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 14:15:00 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D371B12BA7; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:15:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3EA61203; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:14:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1as9x0-000ONd-QX; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 17:14:54 +0300 Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 17:14:54 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Nikolai Lifanov Cc: Ernie Luzar , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 11.0-RELEASE pkg base & base.txz file Message-ID: <20160418141454.GX4841@zxy.spb.ru> References: <5714E89A.8000807@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:15:00 -0000 On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:05:12AM -0400, Nikolai Lifanov wrote: > On 04/18/16 10:00, Ernie Luzar wrote: > > 11.0 will have pkg base, thats ok, but what does than mean for the > > base.txz file? > > > > It it going to stay as part of FBSD install? > > > > I have many scripts for creating jails which depend on the base.txz file. > > It's even easier now: > > # mkdir -p /usr/jails/new > # pkg -r /usr/jails/new install -r base -g '*' And where /etc now? From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 14:16:07 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81DE4B12C7D; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:16:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from baptiste.daroussin@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wm0-x243.google.com (mail-wm0-x243.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 176DB134B; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:16:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from baptiste.daroussin@gmail.com) Received: by mail-wm0-x243.google.com with SMTP id a140so25046439wma.2; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 07:16:07 -0700 (PDT) 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-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=EcmHjKMjvqyj8T6BSdjYS+FMRGeN6Yz+FnGduCIOV1g=; b=a3WTL8A8kkRMKF/zL5IHUHsH4PdJYUn8uReZRKAFJsSMPf53uCRpLPwEHCTsagb+6F 8XcG/v056vGZENMZSe8HLf5lAbejqWdH7JntzFvskMUpvS1GUsPsyBeJWmj+BjX0URFY /urAWOoeWe3UvmYZTTAdOE4eSV8ktSFHByt19kjaABUnwOsmDBS/6LwLTR1Tmon6I0JX V1/X4PNEnVLBM7CNw5Rerhinyae6c+Q5C+XmsJQVYJXQnqMMFScqA+IqyPETR/wFXmrE ecXXwFpmn/Bq61rQDOi+LCPUImy9uhVQ4WPCi8l3w6EDWnhS0CqHb5rB2h0YbNP/s12U 8VGg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=EcmHjKMjvqyj8T6BSdjYS+FMRGeN6Yz+FnGduCIOV1g=; b=iwV/67ReZih/YDOnWYVQkZF9YzMfsaEl5NyYgPoIqdVW5dM+zoFw1uF8zewCm1izEJ 7sk6wyCKy5LtVyGxeMgsGU7K1N78Alp5DGgx5TXXCMYUxIYLx6jqGHgT7vyH9TYz4UuR gGo0EVjLiPPDojoDevQ5NbVufzfN8NUOagzOvVIkZff02QrHDkmywnlr7+g5ay4ROn1X firRev2b50KyJmI55LQxHbS/7vJS55RvkuknhgVjPDc41MiMjPSy7SmZ8b9hHjrd868x /cyTKk1G+108fvSlDDiSVMf+H7uUjrAbpnmRgR5PtitJRyus0AMLLEgJXPQefPhcTn3l bjww== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FWLU8fYBnb/LBBStHj5aL5IkNzebPdotr1uY056Yf05GZ67jucqicMw+mmhnTxvBw== X-Received: by 10.194.81.135 with SMTP id a7mr6476130wjy.170.1460988965186; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 07:16:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivaldir.etoilebsd.net ([2001:41d0:8:db4c::1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g78sm53953644wme.21.2016.04.18.07.16.03 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 18 Apr 2016 07:16:03 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Baptiste Daroussin Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 16:16:01 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: Slawa Olhovchenkov Cc: Nikolai Lifanov , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, Ernie Luzar Subject: Re: 11.0-RELEASE pkg base & base.txz file Message-ID: <20160418141601.GA26116@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> References: <5714E89A.8000807@gmail.com> <20160418141454.GX4841@zxy.spb.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160418141454.GX4841@zxy.spb.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:16:07 -0000 --pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:14:54PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:05:12AM -0400, Nikolai Lifanov wrote: >=20 > > On 04/18/16 10:00, Ernie Luzar wrote: > > > 11.0 will have pkg base, thats ok, but what does than mean for the > > > base.txz file? > > >=20 > > > It it going to stay as part of FBSD install? > > >=20 > > > I have many scripts for creating jails which depend on the base.txz f= ile. > >=20 > > It's even easier now: > >=20 > > # mkdir -p /usr/jails/new > > # pkg -r /usr/jails/new install -r base -g '*' >=20 > And where /etc now? What do you mean? Bapt --pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXFOwhAAoJEGOJi9zxtz5a/ZIQAJ0IJmkeMU0RwnOFEoCWPIrk tykfTAXicF+RS2XcKjjJbSQgrQ6IoeFd+JAHsNWdTTCtj0HKF5KaNIv1lZ4YsqNu o0sbpEYAxmBGUARkWQyxMELmT2RhSlR0yV9geCDjb7NC9pPopfFimUx0vXZ/wFwi D64hrQ6xpUO8lAIe5pgYLarGiTyVEyg/UOSFuqGpi1MFK9LZuAiPnz3l8qb9KOmi RE6WRbbDxeaOopUDIxeXdaXh/Bgd3R86QQ0vwegg4MjfN4Mu8QIx7WMTcIz5vQGk gH8UMPqKNmM9HCb5/5gx+OCahhdGVCqn5tUT7mcVCAW2/Mzj7/TfBKyLDGE+Nl5i d/NOm0wpviS9BOkmrTnxENMQvPPdSa0oIUJ3Vugomag2x4vozzIFR70ElNzC9QPM 3MF3FNgQvWd/V7cXem/GHKSQ3N+5e2EDNlFExq75n7tS9z2uF2vVtD8YRA7t/lcG vDpIKI6U2oY1VIeSeWQzgKxXZg5OFRkd/+9RowugamKjSgzjBBMSdfmwbeklH7Th YkUdREwj/JmSQeAlfCu5Eo1LfmVXQaW5EtbHorHdE2uzmB5pswfYQrlCQqI2JGA0 YLVlE77Bi83JbuG0JGFW2gjQ5N8BJIzutVjeFoZnt1UJDgoQnW2sj0cbGxtd7bJJ LfZ/L3fmqhM3uPf4kJUK =4nR9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt-- From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 14:27:08 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 426A5B130E9; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:27:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03F041AB0; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:27:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1asA8r-000OiV-Ru; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 17:27:09 +0300 Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 17:27:09 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Baptiste Daroussin Cc: Nikolai Lifanov , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, Ernie Luzar Subject: Re: 11.0-RELEASE pkg base & base.txz file Message-ID: <20160418142709.GY4841@zxy.spb.ru> References: <5714E89A.8000807@gmail.com> <20160418141454.GX4841@zxy.spb.ru> <20160418141601.GA26116@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160418141601.GA26116@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:27:08 -0000 On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 04:16:01PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:14:54PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:05:12AM -0400, Nikolai Lifanov wrote: > > > > > On 04/18/16 10:00, Ernie Luzar wrote: > > > > 11.0 will have pkg base, thats ok, but what does than mean for the > > > > base.txz file? > > > > > > > > It it going to stay as part of FBSD install? > > > > > > > > I have many scripts for creating jails which depend on the base.txz file. > > > > > > It's even easier now: > > > > > > # mkdir -p /usr/jails/new > > > # pkg -r /usr/jails/new install -r base -g '*' > > > > And where /etc now? > > What do you mean? At Jan 27 no package containing files from distributeworld. r298107 change this? From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 15:03:23 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2106B13277; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 15:03:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A47311F66; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 15:03:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1asAhx-000Pdx-LJ; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:03:25 +0300 Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:03:25 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Baptiste Daroussin Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, Ernie Luzar Subject: Re: 11.0-RELEASE pkg base & base.txz file Message-ID: <20160418150325.GZ4841@zxy.spb.ru> References: <5714E89A.8000807@gmail.com> <20160418141454.GX4841@zxy.spb.ru> <20160418141601.GA26116@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <20160418142709.GY4841@zxy.spb.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160418142709.GY4841@zxy.spb.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 15:03:24 -0000 On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:27:09PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 04:16:01PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:14:54PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:05:12AM -0400, Nikolai Lifanov wrote: > > > > > > > On 04/18/16 10:00, Ernie Luzar wrote: > > > > > 11.0 will have pkg base, thats ok, but what does than mean for the > > > > > base.txz file? > > > > > > > > > > It it going to stay as part of FBSD install? > > > > > > > > > > I have many scripts for creating jails which depend on the base.txz file. > > > > > > > > It's even easier now: > > > > > > > > # mkdir -p /usr/jails/new > > > > # pkg -r /usr/jails/new install -r base -g '*' > > > > > > And where /etc now? > > > > What do you mean? > > At Jan 27 no package containing files from distributeworld. At Mar 02 > r298107 change this? > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-pkgbase > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-pkgbase-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 18:52:39 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28472B12E4D; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:52:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org) Received: from onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru [IPv6:2a01:4f8:201:6350::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A11AC1982; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:52:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [89.113.128.32]) (Authenticated sender: lev@serebryakov.spb.ru) by onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C1A417E8; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:52:28 +0300 (MSK) Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> To: Glen Barber , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org From: Lev Serebryakov Organization: FreeBSD Message-ID: <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:52:21 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="XtIdACha8xTfvoG8FgjBstUvU774Ajm8B" X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:52:39 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --XtIdACha8xTfvoG8FgjBstUvU774Ajm8B Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="FdWJfP2PF2txj1CjoXQmWiav8p6mf9jkD" From: Lev Serebryakov Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org To: Glen Barber , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Message-ID: <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> --FdWJfP2PF2txj1CjoXQmWiav8p6mf9jkD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 03.03.2016 02:54, Glen Barber wrote: > At present, the base system consists of 755 packages with the default > build (empty src.conf(5) and make.conf(5)) for amd64. The number of > packages depends on several factors, but for most cases a runtime binar= y > is split into several components. In particular, most shared libraries= > are individually packaged, in addition to debugging symbols, profiling > libraries, and 32-bit packaged separately. I understand, that maybe it is too late, but ARE YOU KIDDING?! 755 packages?! WHY?! What are reasons and goals to split base in such enormous number of packages? I understand debug symbols as separate package (one for almost whole base, except several "contrib" parts), I could understand separate package with all static libs (again, ONE package for all system static libraries) and headers. I could understand separate packages for SEVERAL "contrib" chunks: sendmail (it is often replaced by postfix / exim now), kerberos, toolchain and, maybe, unbound. But extract EACH WITH_XXX feature to several separate packages? It looks like nightmare. IMHO, it is very inconvenient for "default" installation and it doesn't look as good replacement to NanoBSD. NanoBSD is much more customized, typically. I don't have THAT number of packages even on "workstation"-like setup with X and some desktop software now, leave sever installation alone. And I don't see, how could this fragmentation could help me, as administrator. But it adds load to "pkg", to many pkg-related scripts, to "pkg version" output, at last! Why, or why, such fine-grained splitting (or should I say "shattering") of base was chosen? Is here good rationale for this? --=20 // Lev Serebryakov --FdWJfP2PF2txj1CjoXQmWiav8p6mf9jkD-- --XtIdACha8xTfvoG8FgjBstUvU774Ajm8B Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJXFSzrXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRGOTZEMUNBMEI1RjQzMThCNjc0QjMzMEFF QUIwM0M1OEJGREM0NzhGAAoJEOqwPFi/3EePqvkP/ispXjrrs8C+G2PVPm+btdDU lyxpiMuM0A5cfa+xyJtFhEU+FgVeisjzroyY5g8d1w+nlxD0hUvI3sEKVUWPOfbM rkVFOOddjxcuRSbficcPGM/aVU/4CMaS160DYHri3vaMq1Iiifzwxa9Bi9ihxoji Su9CEhR6sW4hR7QJxRtcTWNvOgxjesg7xKRU7uDO3IJqbXRtSAX7kK4FYhG83i2W VXd6R5JTUy0Kj0t3pSiZIAg+xOTLYhy3cI9BxGIuvHRZceXAEjQJkAyt8DLyVkby RBvbK2J+fvmCWEJD2UwnZbJfHTuBPWxbK8hO0M8RjUzHJUiNI3CpPCwESNwtXssm AQoIxz8nIVlMrxxeHyroZEeC94442e/iGVmJ8onSAGnB9fVF82gK6wzPJF4rwgdO t+gtjhp3CcAUuau3Ah5uMZzHb3tYNsWGoYURwa3wre+u/LFNwH+7mjI4ctGsYckK GktU+W0wh1VZNhjfEDIepEqJCZAH5X4Q4qLG8LBEtx4g4nVM5EEGphyE6gB/f+9N tIVx1JDK6xSFiRFnFheBUdfgpoiUUQ018pybXkbevqMWdQbzntaFLlBoD46TomfA IHe4yZ7jk4Z8EQaLiH0pKOuzC/uRq5XucaJaStTosdERQ7l3pKI/l5ox5iTaIZUD v+VgggtMNW+jcMuAgGas =kbEe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --XtIdACha8xTfvoG8FgjBstUvU774Ajm8B-- From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 18:57:36 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21715B13182; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:57:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org) Received: from onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru [IPv6:2a01:4f8:201:6350::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBF2E1069; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:57:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [89.113.128.32]) (Authenticated sender: lev@serebryakov.spb.ru) by onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 079237ED; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:57:34 +0300 (MSK) Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> To: Glen Barber , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org From: Lev Serebryakov Organization: FreeBSD Message-ID: <57152E1E.5030203@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:57:34 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ETvTEDXO2bmsQ1BrIeKfG5Q82JcuOUMsJ" X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:57:36 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --ETvTEDXO2bmsQ1BrIeKfG5Q82JcuOUMsJ Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="m9980hDO5palxQPx4lnQ1io8cTqsnxBfr" From: Lev Serebryakov Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org To: Glen Barber , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Message-ID: <57152E1E.5030203@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> --m9980hDO5palxQPx4lnQ1io8cTqsnxBfr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 18.04.2016 21:52, Lev Serebryakov wrote: > kerberos Ok, kerberos could not be packetized at all, as it is compilation option for many other programs in tree. But 755 packets doesn't solve this problem too. --=20 // Lev Serebryakov --m9980hDO5palxQPx4lnQ1io8cTqsnxBfr-- --ETvTEDXO2bmsQ1BrIeKfG5Q82JcuOUMsJ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJXFS4eXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRGOTZEMUNBMEI1RjQzMThCNjc0QjMzMEFF QUIwM0M1OEJGREM0NzhGAAoJEOqwPFi/3EePTBEQAL29UtQCqsUf4YyJlbqm9Lbz Z6UAXxo2KXvI0Y2YaNVREugAB34HG1Zn6NVBRk4hJJSGSsGFUywoF+iMvxyodyqo t1E0vRLQherFi1d8L91e9z4/B9LzF5awpB4zX2xVX361x1Bk3DpLRHWnG/lPEgMv umIS8gCOeKlaNEHtt/qAhzg7emR0Nxl8Y/dz6Irot5uzU2X9fqhOeGlbf9ii6bCD PVWVU5a3o0xd2Cb8rSweQDrH0Jc8QDwpRHAQSuqL8DXVURRPnIp44QxJ7GxkDCTI n5Tc2gIZSzk/tnSjck0mEAgrgHSX3A2+nbBUQEutpYLD0dMYgcyeCKkuRH0FpBVu zXn8+y5IMgJHbg4G0bz2+UkeWpT9ulh9dMVD5X9Zqgo6DeU5xAxSh9h3X5WMUcEj 9fL45U4P/ZCFyaOvc1BqSeZjqdgat7bNMeEkcgPLJzRHH/Og5VWpnTXLFgLYQ2rM Hv6eyxaJo3Kmhp9QtYYD1njJEGWzyEADtd11EKA9mIkKAIRXtFRdchqIgTrzVp3C zkfO1HxQwlxyOFgmdnny7OMn1y8ay0U18rKTzxQJSl/fHuVB0vKwzOc1jEZ6S4lQ 16xp+n78XzZ9sfiSZALwCisMWPl+31L4B4vazacAFjbgZ00Gl6riHHTm3MreF0mN KQK0L+5OP84h/+OLXNm3 =tZDy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ETvTEDXO2bmsQ1BrIeKfG5Q82JcuOUMsJ-- From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 19:01:51 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A2D2B1343A for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:01:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sef@ixsystems.com) Received: from barracuda.ixsystems.com (barracuda.ixsystems.com [12.229.62.30]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.ixsystems.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certificate Authority - G2" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6A0016E2 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:01:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sef@ixsystems.com) X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1461006108-08ca0417883f8c10001-wjM0Vu Received: from zimbra.ixsystems.com ([10.246.0.20]) by barracuda.ixsystems.com with ESMTP id fTa4d3mI6bDuB07Z (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:01:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: sef@ixsystems.com X-Barracuda-RBL-Trusted-Forwarder: 10.246.0.20 X-ASG-Whitelist: Client Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.ixsystems.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8A38C40551; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:01:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zimbra.ixsystems.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.ixsystems.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id 3PZ_izt4-_rB; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:01:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.ixsystems.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E538DC40560; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:01:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ixsystems.com Received: from zimbra.ixsystems.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.ixsystems.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id AkRJTASP39-w; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:01:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.250.1.40] (unknown [10.250.1.40]) by zimbra.ixsystems.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B31B1C404DD; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:01:47 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) From: Sean Fagan X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) In-Reply-To: <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:01:46 -0700 Cc: Glen Barber , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> To: lev@FreeBSD.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) X-Barracuda-Connect: UNKNOWN[10.246.0.20] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1461006108 X-Barracuda-Encrypted: ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 X-Barracuda-URL: https://10.246.0.26:443/cgi-mod/mark.cgi X-Virus-Scanned: by bsmtpd at ixsystems.com X-Barracuda-BRTS-Status: 1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:01:51 -0000 On Apr 18, 2016, at 11:52 AM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: >=20 > I understand, that maybe it is too late, but ARE YOU KIDDING?! 755 > packages?! WHY?! What are reasons and goals to split base in such > enormous number of packages? Just a guess, having done the same thing myself: it means that updates = can be more targeted. Sean. From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 19:14:27 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CCD7B137E8; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:14:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E45D1DE4; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:14:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from FreeBSD.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8BC31135; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:14:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:14:26 +0000 From: Glen Barber To: Sean Fagan Cc: lev@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="S4+Kf2w4CfEO117G" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT amd64 X-SCUD-Definition: Sudden Completely Unexpected Dataloss X-SULE-Definition: Sudden Unexpected Learning Event X-PEKBAC-Definition: Problem Exists, Keyboard Between Admin/Computer User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:14:27 -0000 --S4+Kf2w4CfEO117G Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:01:46PM -0700, Sean Fagan wrote: > On Apr 18, 2016, at 11:52 AM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: > >=20 > > I understand, that maybe it is too late, but ARE YOU KIDDING?! 755 > > packages?! WHY?! What are reasons and goals to split base in such > > enormous number of packages? >=20 > Just a guess, having done the same thing myself: it means that updates c= an be > more targeted. >=20 This is exactly the reason, which has been answered numerous times. Glen --S4+Kf2w4CfEO117G Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXFTIRAAoJEAMUWKVHj+KTPp8P+wXhCNMRrVGMZcBMLn0sGoTM 3tTgSTNm7ttAHAJembbM4IvUlan+nn/2yakkcaWFJ2xeJJXiaqphegQGiyagSrrJ TWUhyJsk1a4QBFoMzFy4xVb4DKqn3l59y6Qn2XkUbs2v+cXdR9Rf52qVbDdmgUpY 8ncI7cxWLfqzbiw4rRU1M+K+XLoTAlG+cs15k/OU88JdmQ+Znj4a3aBr6TmfT520 GmxosLNLvjSwRH/GSr558kfhmAahOrw/DHu6mHWOhQEuMWSAmyKyq5RI+dj4xUAB +r5rG8t8E7HRiQu/JeK1sYQwwMe6/Kkx7VROVxb95sThtb5DDlkFLJBcrVbU0LTN PwendbPXiG7rcRSody2LOWPOa6WJhyA4IayrsfaY9CBTkHzkHU2Iwpbz/M3lK28I mb0j1ka3OTPGpEdWY+PIA+8Jr2qsQ+y46snyEd7VTrlPj23xszfuT8gDhEBUzCrZ U/lUv7QnIu17gTpQnFYEtlE7Pw48mm6OHPYP6bqDAuuQMGqGJA6llpLQmHo/b0rf 3DdLWyJ2MhAwAjs2NDVefWaZKp1tnRVP9NdBhjkcU9+dzTViSP1FmH4fR5weX4rG ecne1RKJIuLE+/lbBg7OgTWjvRweHvOD/UHJnejb8ysv2KbJ0paKe63QXfedup+e 2sKyzqiHWPADuiDzGH0b =Qgea -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --S4+Kf2w4CfEO117G-- From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 19:32:07 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E2FEB130BD; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:32:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nwhitehorn@freebsd.org) Received: from d.mail.sonic.net (d.mail.sonic.net [64.142.111.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BFDE1BF5; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:32:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nwhitehorn@freebsd.org) Received: from zeppelin.tachypleus.net (airbears2-136-152-142-124.airbears2.berkeley.edu [136.152.142.124]) (authenticated bits=0) by d.mail.sonic.net (8.15.1/8.15.1) with ESMTPSA id u3IJLSxV012136 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:21:28 -0700 Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: Glen Barber , Sean Fagan References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> Cc: lev@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org From: Nathan Whitehorn Message-ID: <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:21:28 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Sonic-CAuth: UmFuZG9tSVbZbJpPUwd5jajtYqBeiTkNsO6njAYHiuK1Isz1kVZXtc7cHj5fs3davLqIMiavA7d412y/QwYWTL48wlhwEqKj3cYBblcPSYs= X-Sonic-ID: C;ZsXIv5oF5hGyJ7eqjlfmnQ== M;JEf3v5oF5hGyJ7eqjlfmnQ== X-Spam-Flag: No X-Sonic-Spam-Details: 0.0/5.0 by cerberusd X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:32:07 -0000 On 04/18/16 12:14, Glen Barber wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:01:46PM -0700, Sean Fagan wrote: >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 11:52 AM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: >>> I understand, that maybe it is too late, but ARE YOU KIDDING?! 755 >>> packages?! WHY?! What are reasons and goals to split base in such >>> enormous number of packages? >> Just a guess, having done the same thing myself: it means that updates can be >> more targeted. >> > This is exactly the reason, which has been answered numerous times. > > Glen > That's a good reason -- and a very nice outcome of having base system packages -- but I worry that it may be going too far. The most granular updates would be if every file were its own package, which is obviously crazy, and so there is some middle ground. Needing to grab a whole new base.txz is probably too much (60 MB), but splitting that into even 6 or 7 pieces moves the updates to replacements with typical size (a few MB) that are no larger than typical package updates for ports. -Nathan From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 19:40:11 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D233FB13459; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:40:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF23610E0; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:40:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from FreeBSD.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EDB21880; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:40:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:40:10 +0000 From: Glen Barber To: Nathan Whitehorn Cc: Sean Fagan , lev@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="V6LUty14dADzmtgW" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT amd64 X-SCUD-Definition: Sudden Completely Unexpected Dataloss X-SULE-Definition: Sudden Unexpected Learning Event X-PEKBAC-Definition: Problem Exists, Keyboard Between Admin/Computer User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:40:11 -0000 --V6LUty14dADzmtgW Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:21:28PM -0700, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: >=20 >=20 > On 04/18/16 12:14, Glen Barber wrote: > >On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:01:46PM -0700, Sean Fagan wrote: > >>On Apr 18, 2016, at 11:52 AM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: > >>>I understand, that maybe it is too late, but ARE YOU KIDDING?! 755 > >>>packages?! WHY?! What are reasons and goals to split base in such > >>>enormous number of packages? > >>Just a guess, having done the same thing myself: it means that updates= can be > >>more targeted. > >> > >This is exactly the reason, which has been answered numerous times. > > > >Glen > > >=20 > That's a good reason -- and a very nice outcome of having base system > packages -- but I worry that it may be going too far. The most granular > updates would be if every file were its own package, which is obviously > crazy, and so there is some middle ground. Needing to grab a whole new > base.txz is probably too much (60 MB), but splitting that into even 6 or 7 > pieces moves the updates to replacements with typical size (a few MB) that > are no larger than typical package updates for ports. This granularity allows easy removal of things that may not be wanted (such as *-debug*, *-profile*, etc.) on systems with little storage. On one of my testing systems, I removed the tests packages and all debug and profiling, and the number of base system packages is 383. Glen --V6LUty14dADzmtgW Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXFTgaAAoJEAMUWKVHj+KT5TwQAIKMiIMDD0g6PVp5Cq6m+gBq fEaYR52Xl0kzS7l4smoxu3BQi0SxVp/4ZHG46s/xrdVNM82L+XZnmFEOedoEjKc+ 6zRpjK6Qqyr5pLSZFYVuph0OPbnmM7CtbRZqM/kBQ2/OqpDRl6ePTgpVaahD/5zM urCGlq1q/655Nx2pRzD+/PZIWPrOfSwyGfLMHT0piXuy29OL1Gq3pbX8+GherWnl O4GDf3ngmPinWPw3b9dJHaT12IFxXJ8tjBjKVn0FNgwqkW5S2pwWPLexyPfL+/hL MMVMPuMMM2SWVvRgqDbZM4lymIiSbpXTsh/eY60vJ1yLdeqWaotCc85XalEot8h2 xfAIPGBe/L9KiL8WaxJ3d/2XIOytTWTgelC50ey3U+l+QQpBe6SZBAHnSFO4kYYN VCj0kIOFufyKdrFdCoGzqg6LCK8R/hq6DwJGA/lH9n52KAL+eSlQsqMoROLO+nl4 WZiKSd5aCP4MmCb5Fwj8OzFLj4ID/ywrqykT1v6yFA+UhcTdQMMZ1UQG17dGRPiO +c9eTYK7J2MzIZuilKCIXD9B3ZpyFcTRf3vkGC6C3olMGgRrIK5THwcfOmzb6utR Civ8ORc5vQqFS8qCMRtl4JDW1cQ+z6qecX8YAWROXupELfUIASxDSMu5NwT35PZK 0TmS/QvqLlVGpU4nhZRz =tOGp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --V6LUty14dADzmtgW-- From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 19:42:01 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56B01B135D7; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:42:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from luzar722@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ig0-x241.google.com (mail-ig0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F01C14F3; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:42:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from luzar722@gmail.com) Received: by mail-ig0-x241.google.com with SMTP id qu10so12222397igc.1; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:42:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XwTdXNr1N3kNzCG86Gxk9LjxBJW6x6aWT/7m4YQ2/Os=; b=yDmjjh1NaGeoCChF+JWfUmQUQMli0JLIoVxnOT8LXsxAuJzcwz/8cAvF5EenWDoxaM qqIpW/Xd7BZDLaL78Q/srtqxOQ7lzilwwC4l/74HpE1qXG+yG+fm9M0MGi+O6A1vOKg/ xcH2KL9/LoVQ6WcHImSUt7bnrxHIoynLnK+qnFJDiT9mZaFr/CaPQSGLuthBKC/SOhhR jgP6slVMJYRowTCbUTguiZrYxBM7rKrjVotP7CBkj+DHmDONABhhE3qVbtoz29s8UWlH gkv0c9ImoSdacZ9m4v5TITU/ImoXuz7e44ejielwYVHuLLeshlE6qMrppULOv2KbOcjC FcBw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XwTdXNr1N3kNzCG86Gxk9LjxBJW6x6aWT/7m4YQ2/Os=; b=dCK008aguslB3T1oSq2rAqshXWBi0NZfxDnYb3OZuInNBfEmwmY6OmsH14GQB+zg+H yF7h9AR0gW6cD3gcr8xbNpbIPZSt0Bj+MZJSWrqkl9hgbdqif3aZPBnVJIep8YEHODqr Vtp1a7z3lUOBP6rWwcyAULkiFQ74nI1W2GpZ0YYsfLygiKklIswZ4djS60cKngF08y7A 9DCU0cTMyQ6bV2FOVzlszOkokvCVxz+hET840OqQ1uRZS7d2dSDnUtMepCSqUISHkrC7 vP6TOccRtZUjfQfaXdB8eqy1p4IYvpDl7Czab6PHKH9Zn69LnisziEG6N0ClKyNSJMEr OacQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXuhvPp+t9VfEkDk3oLJ8Be7+Xw8TZiFT/ZFMu5dGT2oqX1iThna8cFtthSGX5pmQ== X-Received: by 10.50.93.138 with SMTP id cu10mr20979974igb.96.1461008520280; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:42:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.10.3] (cpe-76-190-244-6.neo.res.rr.com. [76.190.244.6]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id yf9sm209568igc.16.2016.04.18.12.41.59 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:41:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5715389C.9090502@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 15:42:20 -0400 From: Ernie Luzar User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Slawa Olhovchenkov CC: Baptiste Daroussin , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 11.0-RELEASE pkg base & base.txz file References: <5714E89A.8000807@gmail.com> <20160418141454.GX4841@zxy.spb.ru> <20160418141601.GA26116@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <20160418142709.GY4841@zxy.spb.ru> <20160418150325.GZ4841@zxy.spb.ru> In-Reply-To: <20160418150325.GZ4841@zxy.spb.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:42:01 -0000 Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:27:09PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > >> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 04:16:01PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:14:54PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: >>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:05:12AM -0400, Nikolai Lifanov wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 04/18/16 10:00, Ernie Luzar wrote: >>>>>> 11.0 will have pkg base, thats ok, but what does than mean for the >>>>>> base.txz file? >>>>>> >>>>>> It it going to stay as part of FBSD install? >>>>>> >>>>>> I have many scripts for creating jails which depend on the base.txz file. >>>>> It's even easier now: >>>>> >>>>> # mkdir -p /usr/jails/new >>>>> # pkg -r /usr/jails/new install -r base -g '*' >>>> And where /etc now? >>> What do you mean? >> At Jan 27 no package containing files from distributeworld. > > At Mar 02 > >> r298107 change this? >> You have NOT answered the original question, what's going to happen to the base.txz file in 11.0? From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 20:02:12 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC9C8B13D91; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:02:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98C101F6C; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:02:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1asFN6-0006y7-QP; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:02:12 +0300 Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:02:12 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Glen Barber Cc: Nathan Whitehorn , lev@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <20160418200212.GA4841@zxy.spb.ru> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:02:13 -0000 On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 07:40:10PM +0000, Glen Barber wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:21:28PM -0700, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > > > > > > On 04/18/16 12:14, Glen Barber wrote: > > >On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:01:46PM -0700, Sean Fagan wrote: > > >>On Apr 18, 2016, at 11:52 AM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: > > >>>I understand, that maybe it is too late, but ARE YOU KIDDING?! 755 > > >>>packages?! WHY?! What are reasons and goals to split base in such > > >>>enormous number of packages? > > >>Just a guess, having done the same thing myself: it means that updates can be > > >>more targeted. > > >> > > >This is exactly the reason, which has been answered numerous times. > > > > > >Glen > > > > > > > That's a good reason -- and a very nice outcome of having base system > > packages -- but I worry that it may be going too far. The most granular > > updates would be if every file were its own package, which is obviously > > crazy, and so there is some middle ground. Needing to grab a whole new > > base.txz is probably too much (60 MB), but splitting that into even 6 or 7 > > pieces moves the updates to replacements with typical size (a few MB) that > > are no larger than typical package updates for ports. > > This granularity allows easy removal of things that may not be wanted > (such as *-debug*, *-profile*, etc.) on systems with little storage. On > one of my testing systems, I removed the tests packages and all debug > and profiling, and the number of base system packages is 383. Easy select from list of 1k items?! You kidding? From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 20:03:52 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E49D1B13E32; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:03:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A51EB1107; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:03:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1asFOk-000700-Hx; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:03:54 +0300 Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:03:54 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Ernie Luzar Cc: Baptiste Daroussin , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 11.0-RELEASE pkg base & base.txz file Message-ID: <20160418200354.GB4841@zxy.spb.ru> References: <5714E89A.8000807@gmail.com> <20160418141454.GX4841@zxy.spb.ru> <20160418141601.GA26116@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <20160418142709.GY4841@zxy.spb.ru> <20160418150325.GZ4841@zxy.spb.ru> <5715389C.9090502@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5715389C.9090502@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:03:53 -0000 On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 03:42:20PM -0400, Ernie Luzar wrote: > Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:27:09PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 04:16:01PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > >> > >>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:14:54PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > >>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:05:12AM -0400, Nikolai Lifanov wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> On 04/18/16 10:00, Ernie Luzar wrote: > >>>>>> 11.0 will have pkg base, thats ok, but what does than mean for the > >>>>>> base.txz file? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> It it going to stay as part of FBSD install? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I have many scripts for creating jails which depend on the base.txz file. > >>>>> It's even easier now: > >>>>> > >>>>> # mkdir -p /usr/jails/new > >>>>> # pkg -r /usr/jails/new install -r base -g '*' > >>>> And where /etc now? > >>> What do you mean? > >> At Jan 27 no package containing files from distributeworld. > > > > At Mar 02 > > > >> r298107 change this? > >> > > You have NOT answered the original question, what's going to happen to > the base.txz file in 11.0? Spliting to 800 packages, as I understund. From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 20:05:07 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08967B13FB4; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:05:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC7E0134B; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:05:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from FreeBSD.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E1121DD8; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:05:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:05:05 +0000 From: Glen Barber To: Slawa Olhovchenkov Cc: lev@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, Nathan Whitehorn , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <20160418200505.GY1554@FreeBSD.org> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <20160418200212.GA4841@zxy.spb.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="VIT1Kna7lLfXMiZV" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160418200212.GA4841@zxy.spb.ru> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT amd64 X-SCUD-Definition: Sudden Completely Unexpected Dataloss X-SULE-Definition: Sudden Unexpected Learning Event X-PEKBAC-Definition: Problem Exists, Keyboard Between Admin/Computer User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:05:07 -0000 --VIT1Kna7lLfXMiZV Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 11:02:12PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > This granularity allows easy removal of things that may not be wanted > > (such as *-debug*, *-profile*, etc.) on systems with little storage. On > > one of my testing systems, I removed the tests packages and all debug > > and profiling, and the number of base system packages is 383. >=20 > Easy select from list of 1k items?! > You kidding? >=20 See the pkg(8) '-g' option. Glen --VIT1Kna7lLfXMiZV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXFT3xAAoJEAMUWKVHj+KT6yAP/3Z6tR7QyKXYcH82pq9dEPCQ Ij7cTZN9XbwrxqhUfRKmJMda9C/gK/ZGqUEndSChSqEQkxjz5PnpbciS5OwytYaW AFk1O+p7PeRVV4avsAVDXd4K2G42Z+DhiK2LvXS9pUHhIbtyrYFvP3nyHKu/c30B uFDxnQO6tG+ngsoXomy3fahRCB3Z4pcWpxj+bzCtu0iMt3OoKx2mlNlBtYQbbKUS SrQGqhO+yMiDLdadHQ5/yZLHGNQn1PyclDaNvngXeDkujBOcjcYN9PEaTIKaJAG/ IzSVkCavfOaY13MLppfnFJjDCrcga0ozJ7aa+G7n+Rn973PzWJCgV+cttLo9AxkA sk65Hnkiim9/nbKHxPUXU+qu4xDjcuYiFnGwTgsiCg+BRr+CpQ21PQt0831HhqLQ om+WBxpGSV1464D4PQN5VOr5pjpuzGXkPsEeNx5XjFpYZh2NB8xt9i7HU18NAU4f l8qTjk7rjvc93/iopILzuhXeWisjVZqTou9VPZJXXx+VsfXkIiWOA25i1A795ADJ cM8Xt9Q7rRtC7Zkjx4a3r+cKXDqN9oV4oTHokM87Yo8B9X0j9LmXylck3JX+F8Y1 ycYE29EE+nF9v4gMtOIHOtW1i/+o70ADKMewJ/XDqQEIel8J/HeDtTcKfJSRbyXY a17tLHbsafPDh/wbZ+jM =KKRa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --VIT1Kna7lLfXMiZV-- From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 20:06:45 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D9AEB1314F; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:06:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F26CE17A4; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:06:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1asFRW-00074q-Sp; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:06:46 +0300 Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:06:46 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Glen Barber Cc: lev@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, Nathan Whitehorn , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <20160418200646.GC4841@zxy.spb.ru> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <20160418200212.GA4841@zxy.spb.ru> <20160418200505.GY1554@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160418200505.GY1554@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:06:45 -0000 On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 08:05:05PM +0000, Glen Barber wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 11:02:12PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > > This granularity allows easy removal of things that may not be wanted > > > (such as *-debug*, *-profile*, etc.) on systems with little storage. On > > > one of my testing systems, I removed the tests packages and all debug > > > and profiling, and the number of base system packages is 383. > > > > Easy select from list of 1k items?! > > You kidding? > > > > See the pkg(8) '-g' option. "You have problem. You decide to use rgexps. Your have two problems" (C) From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 20:07:41 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 945DDB1320C; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:07:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org) Received: from onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru [IPv6:2a01:4f8:201:6350::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D30D41946; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:07:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [89.113.128.32]) (Authenticated sender: lev@serebryakov.spb.ru) by onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0D86F811; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:07:38 +0300 (MSK) Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> To: Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn Cc: Sean Fagan , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Lev Serebryakov Organization: FreeBSD Message-ID: <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:07:28 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="QXX56VuupbqeG3FHHdtl52evqOmHBHmT7" X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:07:41 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --QXX56VuupbqeG3FHHdtl52evqOmHBHmT7 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="oIcJXl8HcarqgCc4adwH8nTDQTiLBvFrf" From: Lev Serebryakov Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org To: Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn Cc: Sean Fagan , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Message-ID: <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> --oIcJXl8HcarqgCc4adwH8nTDQTiLBvFrf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 18.04.2016 22:40, Glen Barber wrote: > This granularity allows easy removal of things that may not be wanted > (such as *-debug*, *-profile*, etc.) on systems with little storage. O= n > one of my testing systems, I removed the tests packages and all debug > and profiling, and the number of base system packages is 383. IMHO, granularity like "all base debug", "all base profile" is enough for this. Really, I hardly could imagine why I will need only 1 debug or profile package, say, for csh. On resource-constrained systems NanoBSD is much better anyway (for example, my typical NanoBSD installation is 37MB base system, 12MB /boot and 10 packages), and on developer system where you need profiled libraries it is Ok to install all of them and don't think about 100 packages for them. Idea of "Roles" from old FreeBSD installers looks much better. Again, here are some "contrib" software which have one-to-one replacements in ports, like sendmail, ssh/sshd, ntpd, but split all other FreeBSD-specific code? Yes, debug. Yes, profile. Yes, static libraries. Yes, lib32 on 64 bit system. It seems that it is ideological ("holy war") discussion more than technical one... --=20 // Lev Serebryakov --oIcJXl8HcarqgCc4adwH8nTDQTiLBvFrf-- --QXX56VuupbqeG3FHHdtl52evqOmHBHmT7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJXFT6IXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRGOTZEMUNBMEI1RjQzMThCNjc0QjMzMEFF QUIwM0M1OEJGREM0NzhGAAoJEOqwPFi/3EePmYQP/A27i8gILE2Hcoo59lnLIcfv ho5ulcODmjWJ+lRww3UtkyNKqEyk6yqw1uPlkBBjV+6upZv1OXv+ESPK+wUNJ85L Z9MTHHup0TYDNjQgLR+j2J9Fxa7hhRR7eE3qr+dFfjx/v+wFwJ6bctjZ52D33Lbz iznOsTxNbTCmRXaxKdVMeR5OS0wGB78Tl0brMj9YBn8stb6OinkituV+dSRDBrDL BBt8yzPdPwGL/iz9zZXTJsvjp3oMhRnyxFZszX5Ko/MoqRUr2GjO916lP8dF4bf3 KaS9QkP9d3Oqpe1FiWOrbbDAzOm4akeCsIev7NG3L5/CpcKhk0KzLb3uYhzC81Zq kd0LWvTb27VelksvJT+umvEYxjQLmn/ssyQafXPUgPyWQYEIE+dIuHU3SKWGQLkM Xdef+4g3zQOMWFHl14ErPwYu2wp8qkFaG0zBDDcAUfm20JkLfSAIsHBCpbiLTmdC qgirfDn8Z/4rN7RTeaXrQAdxNY/MOlgaZ6nVwIf5+0ofyCqB7Z5oxdEKIE3H69iA WVidAK3EQ2VsHGb2Pb03CH2/HT4OXfgt7XvgVKWW3NIdnaIY7AOOSz3Y+6E7pt1x CvpnWRYCTLcOr7LSwuSNL7W5yztY44O5j+UWsW0r46jnbSgabfkkFbOZkfl51EHS B5ooQUEbU1DfHKJCqISq =Oi1L -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --QXX56VuupbqeG3FHHdtl52evqOmHBHmT7-- From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 21:29:23 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D08ACB1333B; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:29:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alfred@freebsd.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B12AA1394; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:29:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alfred@freebsd.org) Received: from Alfreds-MacBook-Pro-2.local (unknown [IPv6:2601:645:8003:a4d6:e40e:f317:bae8:c89e]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A3EA3346DE31; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:29:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: lev@FreeBSD.org, Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Sean Fagan , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Alfred Perlstein Organization: FreeBSD Message-ID: <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:29:15 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:29:23 -0000 Guys please stop arguing about the number of packages. The high granularity is VERY useful! Managing large groups of small packages is much easier than just having large packages. All this can be done by meta-packages which depend on larger package groups. Later pkg can be augmented to "remove packages not explicitly installed" which would remove leaf packages. Example: you installed "base-debug" which pulls in let's say 50 small packages, later you want all of those removed, you can do something like: "pkg delete --leafs base-debug" which should delete "base-debug" and any dangling packages it pulled in not required by other pkgs. Huge thanks to the team that implemented this! thanks. -Alfred On 4/18/16 1:07 PM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: > On 18.04.2016 22:40, Glen Barber wrote: > >> This granularity allows easy removal of things that may not be wanted >> (such as *-debug*, *-profile*, etc.) on systems with little storage. On >> one of my testing systems, I removed the tests packages and all debug >> and profiling, and the number of base system packages is 383. > IMHO, granularity like "all base debug", "all base profile" is enough > for this. Really, I hardly could imagine why I will need only 1 debug or > profile package, say, for csh. On resource-constrained systems NanoBSD > is much better anyway (for example, my typical NanoBSD installation is > 37MB base system, 12MB /boot and 10 packages), and on developer system > where you need profiled libraries it is Ok to install all of them and > don't think about 100 packages for them. > > Idea of "Roles" from old FreeBSD installers looks much better. Again, > here are some "contrib" software which have one-to-one replacements in > ports, like sendmail, ssh/sshd, ntpd, but split all other > FreeBSD-specific code? Yes, debug. Yes, profile. Yes, static libraries. > Yes, lib32 on 64 bit system. > > It seems that it is ideological ("holy war") discussion more than > technical one... > From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 21:37:32 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A79DB1375E for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:37:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from matthew@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk [81.2.117.100]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 187B91BAC for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:37:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from matthew@FreeBSD.org) Received: from liminal.local (liminal.infracaninophile.co.uk [IPv6:2001:8b0:151:1:3636:3bff:fed4:b0d6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) by smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C85F411E17 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:37:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk; dmarc=none header.from=FreeBSD.org Authentication-Results: smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk/C85F411E17; dkim=none; dkim-atps=neutral Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> From: Matthew Seaman Message-ID: <5715538B.2050900@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 22:37:15 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0ITJ7nU0rot1CpNuUSGclRBmJ7M4Nnsxi" X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.1 at smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:37:32 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --0ITJ7nU0rot1CpNuUSGclRBmJ7M4Nnsxi Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="cJhOtV2SpQvbWIQ1uNEXqEHeGtxIHQrND" From: Matthew Seaman To: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Message-ID: <5715538B.2050900@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> --cJhOtV2SpQvbWIQ1uNEXqEHeGtxIHQrND Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 18/04/2016 22:29, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > Later pkg can be augmented to "remove packages not explicitly installed= " > which would remove leaf packages. >=20 > Example: you installed "base-debug" which pulls in let's say 50 small > packages, later you want all of those removed, you can do something > like: "pkg delete --leafs base-debug" which should delete "base-debug"= > and any dangling packages it pulled in not required by other pkgs. pkg-autoremove(8) It already does this. Cheers, Matthew --cJhOtV2SpQvbWIQ1uNEXqEHeGtxIHQrND-- --0ITJ7nU0rot1CpNuUSGclRBmJ7M4Nnsxi Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJXFVORXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ2NTNBNjhCOTEzQTRFNkNGM0UxRTEzMjZC QjIzQUY1MThFMUE0MDEzAAoJELsjr1GOGkAT7CMP/iU2f+H/tiRwGD+VlS1c4Pck IPH/BE587M69n1qy2aDT0XqEnZQ/5fmKlF549poxpbb4I6cxh0UGtkiYpBoFPAAS RiuFdHvJ0cVGhmJt08yrgVnDWXEeZ/PFGj4TwgpNNf/FG0LnxA+NoRtj+ydy8K11 z5KuRlKOWmM3yG2RTZueiF2F/yEVRmMfWSd4r55oGO6KvEiWz4gpFCi5D8P+9/zw bTtAnZ3/LOfny7Zdr1JLbycRPBPCcx+DmNxcpa2urR4dpms9PjD3kNNsxzEVy3gx FBgRS6bdXIiYFoYr2xBrMXn+HSmfeAfFlZCgmQ+p6xtXI/uJLw83Kppc4ZxOFsF9 JiMNHOW997QNA8LQ7PwdB1rLoKOwC6zc4V2v0ds4OHWMcOTvwjhV6DDTpR0SRLfD i8Kad7kqHaahe1KPxMuOAElOpbmo/ppMweGqBI/rAYfrPmueLVxpHrqRLLmutGXK yNQiBFNGJydSqbVGe8WyzWVIwBT08LdrFB6PhDHzUD9wnzQM85KdVT526n7x+b9l LAIdfI5FNMQeTxeYFRji37uh4RfvSSDPiNpiV0Ql0BELoYDP3P7nuj12MDJ//HYl VQSjcSYYoCNBcEMfSswuITCrOJDVDBQoEU00quLY3VR0LJ6C74La+tW+r6tMOp8J QmCAIIdTDzSiXhRuAJZ/ =qyyX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --0ITJ7nU0rot1CpNuUSGclRBmJ7M4Nnsxi-- From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 21:43:09 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93AE3B139B5; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:43:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54B1B1E99; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:43:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1asGwm-0009Y7-Gp; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 00:43:08 +0300 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 00:43:08 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Sean Fagan Cc: lev@FreeBSD.org, Glen Barber , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <20160418214308.GC6614@zxy.spb.ru> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:43:09 -0000 On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:01:46PM -0700, Sean Fagan wrote: > On Apr 18, 2016, at 11:52 AM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: > > > > I understand, that maybe it is too late, but ARE YOU KIDDING?! 755 > > packages?! WHY?! What are reasons and goals to split base in such > > enormous number of packages? > > Just a guess, having done the same thing myself: it means that updates can be > more targeted. Realy? I am now try to upgrade test VM from CFT version (from /project) to current. Upgraded only 407 packages. All -lib32- packages don't upgraded. OK, how I do debug this? What system state I am have now? What hapened? What I need to do? From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 21:48:27 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85220B13B9B; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:48:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45F8E109B; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:48:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1asH1x-0009fO-Ax; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 00:48:29 +0300 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 00:48:29 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Nathan Whitehorn Cc: Glen Barber , Sean Fagan , lev@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <20160418214829.GD6614@zxy.spb.ru> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:48:27 -0000 On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:21:28PM -0700, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > > > On 04/18/16 12:14, Glen Barber wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:01:46PM -0700, Sean Fagan wrote: > >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 11:52 AM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: > >>> I understand, that maybe it is too late, but ARE YOU KIDDING?! 755 > >>> packages?! WHY?! What are reasons and goals to split base in such > >>> enormous number of packages? > >> Just a guess, having done the same thing myself: it means that updates can be > >> more targeted. > >> > > This is exactly the reason, which has been answered numerous times. > > > > Glen > > > > That's a good reason -- and a very nice outcome of having base system > packages -- but I worry that it may be going too far. The most granular > updates would be if every file were its own package, which is obviously Allowing to have one file in multiple packages may be solution: base-11.0.txz have /usr/libexec/sendmail/sendmail base-11.0-p1.txz depends on base-11.0.txz and contains just single /usr/libexec/sendmail/sendmail -- security update. This packages must be installed together and presents /usr/libexec/sendmail/sendmail in both must not be error. > crazy, and so there is some middle ground. Needing to grab a whole new > base.txz is probably too much (60 MB), but splitting that into even 6 or > 7 pieces moves the updates to replacements with typical size (a few MB) > that are no larger than typical package updates for ports. > -Nathan From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 22:12:06 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 063DFB13619; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 22:12:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC5DE1204; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 22:12:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1asHOp-000ADQ-6h; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 01:12:07 +0300 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 01:12:07 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Sean Fagan Cc: lev@FreeBSD.org, Glen Barber , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <20160418221207.GF6614@zxy.spb.ru> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418214308.GC6614@zxy.spb.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160418214308.GC6614@zxy.spb.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 22:12:06 -0000 On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 12:43:08AM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:01:46PM -0700, Sean Fagan wrote: > > > On Apr 18, 2016, at 11:52 AM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: > > > > > > I understand, that maybe it is too late, but ARE YOU KIDDING?! 755 > > > packages?! WHY?! What are reasons and goals to split base in such > > > enormous number of packages? > > > > Just a guess, having done the same thing myself: it means that updates can be > > more targeted. > > Realy? > I am now try to upgrade test VM from CFT version (from /project) to > current. > Upgraded only 407 packages. > All -lib32- packages don't upgraded. > OK, how I do debug this? > What system state I am have now? > What hapened? > What I need to do? Oh. Not only lib32. root@pkg-test:/usr/src # pkg info | grep kernel FreeBSD-kernel-generic-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 FreeBSD GENERIC kernel -debug FreeBSD-kernel-generic-release-11.0.s20160304190332 FreeBSD GENERIC kernel release Realy, I am can't see in list of 756 files what is updated and what not. From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 00:09:16 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7595B13C14; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 00:09:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nwhitehorn@freebsd.org) Received: from d.mail.sonic.net (d.mail.sonic.net [64.142.111.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE1B11791; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 00:09:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nwhitehorn@freebsd.org) Received: from zeppelin.tachypleus.net (75-101-50-44.static.sonic.net [75.101.50.44]) (authenticated bits=0) by d.mail.sonic.net (8.15.1/8.15.1) with ESMTPSA id u3J09E6M019304 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 18 Apr 2016 17:09:14 -0700 Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: Alfred Perlstein , lev@freebsd.org, Glen Barber References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> Cc: Sean Fagan , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Nathan Whitehorn Message-ID: <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 17:09:14 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Sonic-CAuth: UmFuZG9tSVZ/dgPMLQpM16vkAMLVK9HCg+UIyu/ixZAbFDyHDlzsetLeFXZftM0iYbVRwTDKGNnUyr2uTQXj2smm+kJOQIeLLCXSzNaPKog= X-Sonic-ID: C;skAt88IF5hGVMLeqjlfmnQ== M;BKp288IF5hGVMLeqjlfmnQ== X-Spam-Flag: No X-Sonic-Spam-Details: 0.0/5.0 by cerberusd X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 00:09:17 -0000 On 04/18/16 14:29, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > Guys please stop arguing about the number of packages. The high > granularity is VERY useful! > > Managing large groups of small packages is much easier than just > having large packages. I'm not so sure about these statements. Maintaining groups of packages can be easier, but it can be also be harder. The goal is to find the right level. And I haven't seen a case where an 800-packages level of granularity is helpful. Maybe you can suggest one? I can, however, see the reverse case, where it leads, in addition to system administration hassle, to a balkanization of the base system, the predictability of which is one of FreeBSD's greatest assets. More granularity than we have is good (having the ability to strip debug information, profiling, sendmail, the toolchain, etc.) and it is going to be very nice to have that. But I can name of order 10 packages where that makes sense. I think we will learn to regret 800. Clearly you can have too few (one giant package called "FreeBSD 11" -- although this is a model that works for many organizations) and you can have too many (every file is its own package -- no one does this). I'm not sure where the optimum is, but this seems way too far in the direction of the latter. > All this can be done by meta-packages which depend on larger package > groups. > > Later pkg can be augmented to "remove packages not explicitly > installed" which would remove leaf packages. > > Example: you installed "base-debug" which pulls in let's say 50 small > packages, later you want all of those removed, you can do something > like: "pkg delete --leafs base-debug" which should delete > "base-debug" and any dangling packages it pulled in not required by > other pkgs. But what benefit do you get from the sub-packages? Let's say you have a single package that is the debug files for one library. Why would you ever care about that specific package? I can see why you might want all the debug files as a separate thing, but this seems way too fine-grained to be useful. Put another way, the base system for FreeBSD 11 (I grabbed a powerpc64 distfile because I had it handy) has 11765 files in it, neglecting symlinks. Split into 755 packages, the average package then has just 15 files in it. You are rapidly approaching pkg info resembling ls -R / at that point and managing the system at the individual file level, which totally defeats the concept of packaging things. If you remove files in var, share, etc, and /usr/include from that list (which include things like all the timezone files, which are hopefully packaged together, or all the man pages), this average is 2.1 files per package. > > Huge thanks to the team that implemented this! Yes, of course. Please do not interpret my comments about the level of discretization of packages as in any way reflecting the project in general, which is broader than this issue. We need better tools than tar and patch to manage the system; using pkg is a huge step forward. -Nathan > > thanks. > -Alfred > > On 4/18/16 1:07 PM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: >> On 18.04.2016 22:40, Glen Barber wrote: >> >>> This granularity allows easy removal of things that may not be wanted >>> (such as *-debug*, *-profile*, etc.) on systems with little >>> storage. On >>> one of my testing systems, I removed the tests packages and all debug >>> and profiling, and the number of base system packages is 383. >> IMHO, granularity like "all base debug", "all base profile" is enough >> for this. Really, I hardly could imagine why I will need only 1 debug or >> profile package, say, for csh. On resource-constrained systems NanoBSD >> is much better anyway (for example, my typical NanoBSD installation is >> 37MB base system, 12MB /boot and 10 packages), and on developer system >> where you need profiled libraries it is Ok to install all of them and >> don't think about 100 packages for them. >> >> Idea of "Roles" from old FreeBSD installers looks much better. Again, >> here are some "contrib" software which have one-to-one replacements in >> ports, like sendmail, ssh/sshd, ntpd, but split all other >> FreeBSD-specific code? Yes, debug. Yes, profile. Yes, static libraries. >> Yes, lib32 on 64 bit system. >> >> It seems that it is ideological ("holy war") discussion more than >> technical one... >> > From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 01:24:19 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 351FDB14519; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 01:24:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lyndon@orthanc.ca) Received: from orthanc.ca (orthanc.ca [IPv6:2607:f2f8:abf8::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "orthanc.ca", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X1" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 209BA1EE2; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 01:24:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lyndon@orthanc.ca) Received: from minnie.bitsea.ca ([24.114.43.34]) (authenticated bits=0) by orthanc.ca (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u3J1OHaT053841 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:24:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lyndon@orthanc.ca) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Lyndon Nerenberg Message-ID: <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:24:11 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 01:24:19 -0000 On 2016-04-18 5:09 PM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > I'm not so sure about these statements. Maintaining groups of packages > can be easier, but it can be also be harder. The goal is to find the > right level. And I haven't seen a case where an 800-packages level of > granularity is helpful. Not to mention regression testing. The number of combinations of installed packages is going to be choose(1, 800) + chose(2, 800) + ... + choose(800, 800). And while some of those combinations will be non-nonsensical, many(!) won't. There aren't enough seconds in the universe to test all the viable combinations for one single release. If fact, I would suggest a good metric for package granularity be based on the set of combinations that *can* be tested in a realistic timeframe for each release. --lyndon From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 02:10:02 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BB55B12AF2; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 02:10:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marquis@roble.com) Received: from mx5.roble.com (mx5.roble.com [206.40.34.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx5.roble.com", Issuer "mx5.roble.com" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F412D11A6; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 02:10:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marquis@roble.com) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:01:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Roger Marquis To: Lyndon Nerenberg cc: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) In-Reply-To: <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 02:10:02 -0000 Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > There aren't enough seconds in the universe to test all the viable > combinations for one single release. Can you explain what would be accomplished by testing all or even a fraction of the possible permutations of base package combinations? We don't do that for ports. Other operating systems don't do that for their base packages. Honestly, some of us are wondering what exactly is behind some of these concerns regarding base packages. Roger Marquis From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 02:23:14 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B82FB1343D; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 02:23:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lyndon@orthanc.ca) Received: from orthanc.ca (orthanc.ca [IPv6:2607:f2f8:abf8::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "orthanc.ca", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X1" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E3671CB5; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 02:23:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lyndon@orthanc.ca) Received: from minnie.bitsea.ca ([24.114.43.34]) (authenticated bits=0) by orthanc.ca (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u3J2NClG054122 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:23:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lyndon@orthanc.ca) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> <201604190201.u3J216NQ054020@orthanc.ca> From: Lyndon Nerenberg To: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Message-ID: <5715968B.303@orthanc.ca> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:23:07 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <201604190201.u3J216NQ054020@orthanc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 02:23:14 -0000 On 2016-04-18 7:01 PM, Roger Marquis wrote: > Can you explain what would be accomplished by testing all or even a > fraction of the possible permutations of base package combinations? We > don't do that for ports. The ports tree isn't a mandatory part of the system. And by definition it could not be tested that way, since it offers so many alternative implementations of specific functionality. > Other operating systems don't do that for > their base packages. I'm pretty sure Solaris had some fairly hard-core regression tests to ensure basic system functionality wouldn't be compromised by 'oddball' selections of packages offered up at install time. > Honestly, some of us are wondering what exactly is > behind some of these concerns regarding base packages. The concern is from all of us UNIX dinosaurs who predate the fine-grained packaging environment, which just worked, and who now rip our (little remaining) hair out due to unsolvable package dependency loops in the Linux machines we are forced to administer in order to pay rent. For me, as a sysadmin, I derive a negative benefit from this optimization. I guess what I'm really asking is: where is the peer reviewed research that shows this actually improves things for the not-1% of FreeBSD users? --lyndon P.S. Don't turn this into a pissing match. I really want to know how this is of net benefit to everyone. But I don't want hyperbole. I have looked at a lot of, e.g., USENIX and ACM, bibliographies and papers for justification for this, and I can't find it. It would really help (me, at least) if someone could take a moment to point me at demonstrable evidence of the benefits of this model. From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 03:17:13 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5B40B1381C; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 03:17:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alfred@freebsd.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [IPv6:2001:470:1f05:b76::196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEAA61A4F; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 03:17:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alfred@freebsd.org) Received: from Alfreds-MacBook-Pro-2.local (unknown [IPv6:2601:645:8003:a4d6:d97:1c0:57d4:6aac]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 40E34346DF90; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:17:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: Lyndon Nerenberg , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> <201604190201.u3J216NQ054020@orthanc.ca> <5715968B.303@orthanc.ca> From: Alfred Perlstein Organization: FreeBSD Message-ID: <5715A338.5060009@freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:17:12 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5715968B.303@orthanc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 03:17:14 -0000 Maybe what the "too many packages" folks need to do is write some code to hide that it's so many packages. :) I think the rule of two feet should be applied here. What we have is people that have worked quite hard to bring us something that we can easily work with, and on the other hand some folks that want something they consider even better. Personally I can't see how having the system less granular is better, since having it MORE granular is actually harder work. Can someone on the "too many packages" campaign here explain to me how having too fine a granularity stops you from making macro packages containing packages? Because honestly I can't see how having granularity hurts at all when if someone wanted to make it less granular all they would have to do is make some meta-packages. -Alfred On 4/18/16 7:23 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > On 2016-04-18 7:01 PM, Roger Marquis wrote: >> Can you explain what would be accomplished by testing all or even a >> fraction of the possible permutations of base package combinations? We >> don't do that for ports. > > The ports tree isn't a mandatory part of the system. And by definition > it could not be tested that way, since it offers so many alternative > implementations of specific functionality. > >> Other operating systems don't do that for >> their base packages. > > I'm pretty sure Solaris had some fairly hard-core regression tests to > ensure basic system functionality wouldn't be compromised by 'oddball' > selections of packages offered up at install time. > > > Honestly, some of us are wondering what exactly is > > behind some of these concerns regarding base packages. > > The concern is from all of us UNIX dinosaurs who predate the > fine-grained packaging environment, which just worked, and who now rip > our (little remaining) hair out due to unsolvable package dependency > loops in the Linux machines we are forced to administer in order to > pay rent. For me, as a sysadmin, I derive a negative benefit from > this optimization. > > I guess what I'm really asking is: where is the peer reviewed research > that shows this actually improves things for the not-1% of FreeBSD users? > > --lyndon > > P.S. Don't turn this into a pissing match. I really want to know how > this is of net benefit to everyone. But I don't want hyperbole. I > have looked at a lot of, e.g., USENIX and ACM, bibliographies and > papers for justification for this, and I can't find it. It would > really help (me, at least) if someone could take a moment to point me > at demonstrable evidence of the benefits of this model. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 03:24:24 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 123B6B13CEF; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 03:24:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lyndon@orthanc.ca) Received: from orthanc.ca (orthanc.ca [IPv6:2607:f2f8:abf8::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "orthanc.ca", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X1" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF3FE11C3; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 03:24:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lyndon@orthanc.ca) Received: from minnie.bitsea.ca ([24.114.43.34]) (authenticated bits=0) by orthanc.ca (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u3J3OMlC054412 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:24:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lyndon@orthanc.ca) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: Alfred Perlstein , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> <201604190201.u3J216NQ054020@orthanc.ca> <5715968B.303@orthanc.ca> <5715A338.5060009@freebsd.org> From: Lyndon Nerenberg Message-ID: <5715A4E1.5090606@orthanc.ca> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:24:17 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5715A338.5060009@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 03:24:24 -0000 On 2016-04-18 8:17 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > Can someone on the "too many packages" campaign here explain to me how > having too fine a granularity stops you from making macro packages > containing packages? > > Because honestly I can't see how having granularity hurts at all when if > someone wanted to make it less granular all they would have to do is > make some meta-packages. It's the *I have to put it back together* part that's annoying. I didn't break something that has worked, forever. It shouldn't be incumbent on me to un-break someone else's work. Now if the system ships with each-file-in-a-package, fine. Just give me gross subsets that make my life as a sysadmin liveable. E.g., base POSIX functionality should be a 'group' package. And I would hope, the default installation package. I would go for the argument that, e.g., the dev stuff (cc, yacc, lex) could be split off, but at least include the headers that match what's in /lib and /usr/lib, in a compiler agnostic set. Since the point of packages is to allow for selections of optional software. --lyndon From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 07:03:43 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90627B14A20 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:03:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from erik+lists@cederstrand.dk) Received: from mailrelay3.public.one.com (mailrelay3.public.one.com [195.47.247.221]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01266176F for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:03:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from erik+lists@cederstrand.dk) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=cederstrand.dk; s=20140924; h=from:subject:date:message-id:to:cc:mime-version:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references; bh=vMQ8VbH20BKEXOzFIP4VW3ZQb/SsUKzfsQCOQE6UCFM=; b=YcMG6d/5/XMztRwJxCg6YzyeWWOWIGCv6ek7g0SrRkqgOu8IlioqmKIzDmDXLcvaf8EfDOtaN8GAk GlZwejSVttndPuG2B7aZM7/87WvZsJX4EG73FjWk7RG5H8j6bXE5m1XTmNawGgOMTpg/pwmcPUrQOz PqPcejG1GaFFsieg= X-HalOne-Cookie: 6ea18e367121db6bd172cbeae1a0a69ff1d11cc0 X-HalOne-ID: adec96d6-05fc-11e6-a8e4-b8ca3afa9d73 Received: from [172.20.10.2] (unknown [94.191.186.169]) by smtpfilter1.public.one.com (Halon Mail Gateway) with ESMTPSA; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:02:28 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) From: Erik Cederstrand In-Reply-To: <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:02:24 +0200 Cc: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, FreeBSD-Current Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <9144F2D3-F039-4F65-9760-AD5B7F47D3E3@cederstrand.dk> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> To: Lyndon Nerenberg X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:03:43 -0000 > Den 19. apr. 2016 kl. 03.24 skrev Lyndon Nerenberg = : >=20 > There aren't enough seconds in the universe to test all the viable = combinations for one single release. We don't even do that with the WITH_FOO/WITHOUT_FOO options now, so why = should that be a criteria? You can use any combination of those build = options today, sure, but if something breaks you're on your own (you're = always on your own, for that matter, since this is open source). Seriously, there arguments put forth here against packaged base are = pretty embarrassing. If you don't like packaged base, don't use it. = Build and install from SVN instead. If you're using freebsd-update = today, you essentially have 14.000 packages and a far less powerful CLI, = so why is packaged base not a step in the right direction? Erik= From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 07:32:33 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5379DB133DB; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:32:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 15118174F; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:32:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1asQ9B-000NYS-UY; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:32:33 +0300 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:32:33 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Alfred Perlstein Cc: Lyndon Nerenberg , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <20160419073233.GD4841@zxy.spb.ru> References: <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> <201604190201.u3J216NQ054020@orthanc.ca> <5715968B.303@orthanc.ca> <5715A338.5060009@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5715A338.5060009@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:32:33 -0000 On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 08:17:12PM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > Maybe what the "too many packages" folks need to do is write some code > to hide that it's so many packages. > > :) > > I think the rule of two feet should be applied here. > > What we have is people that have worked quite hard to bring us something > that we can easily work with, and on the other hand some folks that want > something they consider even better. Personally I can't see how having > the system less granular is better, since having it MORE granular is > actually harder work. > > Can someone on the "too many packages" campaign here explain to me how > having too fine a granularity stops you from making macro packages > containing packages? > > Because honestly I can't see how having granularity hurts at all when if > someone wanted to make it less granular all they would have to do is > make some meta-packages. Because this is imposible (or very hard) to implement. After last update (realy update) I have partyaly updated system -- some packages updated, some -- not (I am expect all packages must be updated). Imposible to combine 800 packages to less meta-package and distinct improper partial update from proper. And how I am can paste this list of packages? From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 07:37:30 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B729B1380A; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:37:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 000.fbsd@quip.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (elsa.codelab.cz [94.124.105.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D39D1E04; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:37:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 000.fbsd@quip.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id D750228412; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:37:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from illbsd.quip.test (ip-86-49-16-209.net.upcbroadband.cz [86.49.16.209]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1556728417; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:37:19 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <5715E02E.4000404@quip.cz> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:37:18 +0200 From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/35.0 SeaMonkey/2.32 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lyndon Nerenberg , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> <201604190201.u3J216NQ054020@orthanc.ca> <5715968B.303@orthanc.ca> <5715A338.5060009@freebsd.org> <5715A4E1.5090606@orthanc.ca> In-Reply-To: <5715A4E1.5090606@orthanc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:37:30 -0000 Lyndon Nerenberg wrote on 04/19/2016 05:24: > On 2016-04-18 8:17 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >> Can someone on the "too many packages" campaign here explain to me how >> having too fine a granularity stops you from making macro packages >> containing packages? >> >> Because honestly I can't see how having granularity hurts at all when if >> someone wanted to make it less granular all they would have to do is >> make some meta-packages. Meta-packages doesn't hide anything (in list of packages and problems with dependencies) > It's the *I have to put it back together* part that's annoying. I > didn't break something that has worked, forever. It shouldn't be > incumbent on me to un-break someone else's work. +1 And you made another good point in previous e-mail about reviewed research. I would really like to see some docs about this topic. I have a feeling that some work on FreeBSD is against average users / admins and is good only for vedors of specialized or embedded devices. As many before - I am not against packaging base. It is good, but 10 - 20 packages will be enough. 800+ is too far from my feeling of "this is good feature". This seems like a nightmare to me. This was one of the reasons I don't like other OS distribuitions and I stayed with FreeBSD for more than 15 years. Miroslav Lachman From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 07:44:54 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D620B13E34; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:44:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from vps1.elischer.org (vps1.elischer.org [204.109.63.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "vps1.elischer.org", Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2F0513E2; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:44:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from Julian-MBP3.local (ppp121-45-252-92.lns20.per4.internode.on.net [121.45.252.92]) (authenticated bits=0) by vps1.elischer.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u3J7ilhI016130 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 19 Apr 2016 00:44:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: Alfred Perlstein , lev@FreeBSD.org, Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> Cc: Sean Fagan , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Julian Elischer Message-ID: <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:44:41 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:44:54 -0000 On 19/04/2016 5:29 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > Guys please stop arguing about the number of packages. The high > granularity is VERY useful! > it's going to make us a laughing stock "look FreeBSD just split into 1.43 million packages" (effectively the same number.. it's bigger than 10) > Managing large groups of small packages is much easier than just > having large packages. err, Alfred, what planet do you live on? when they get out of sync it becomes a nightmare. If you also had a packaging system that was smart enough to manage a hierarchy of packages then "maybe".. > > All this can be done by meta-packages which depend on larger package > groups. Currently Metapackage is a way to make 10 packages look like 11 packages. The framework needs to understand to hide the 10 internal packages if they are part of a metapackage. > > Later pkg can be augmented to "remove packages not explicitly > installed" which would remove leaf packages. > > Example: you installed "base-debug" which pulls in let's say 50 > small packages, later you want all of those removed, you can do > something like: "pkg delete --leafs base-debug" which should delete > "base-debug" and any dangling packages it pulled in not required by > other pkgs. > > Huge thanks to the team that implemented this! I'm sure the work was large and will be useful in the future but we are not ready to have the system installed like this. no-one wants to see 750 packages show up when you do an enquiry on a newly installed system. I could live with: base-utils 11.1 - ktrace uninstalled - tcpdump uninstalled + dd 11.1.1 (CVE-123412 fix) but not {700 packages ) dd 11.1.1 dd with CVE fix {29 more packages} [tcpdump line is not present but you don't notice that] {10 more packages} [ktrace line would be here but you don't notice that either] {15 more packages} In other words, I have no objection to all the utilities coming in the form of little packages. but I have a major objection if that fact is at all obvious to the end user, and certainly if we need to wade through 750 packages to see what's going on. > > thanks. > -Alfred > > On 4/18/16 1:07 PM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: >> On 18.04.2016 22:40, Glen Barber wrote: >> >>> This granularity allows easy removal of things that may not be wanted >>> (such as *-debug*, *-profile*, etc.) on systems with little >>> storage. On >>> one of my testing systems, I removed the tests packages and all debug >>> and profiling, and the number of base system packages is 383. >> IMHO, granularity like "all base debug", "all base profile" is >> enough >> for this. Really, I hardly could imagine why I will need only 1 >> debug or >> profile package, say, for csh. On resource-constrained systems NanoBSD >> is much better anyway (for example, my typical NanoBSD installation is >> 37MB base system, 12MB /boot and 10 packages), and on developer system >> where you need profiled libraries it is Ok to install all of them and >> don't think about 100 packages for them. >> >> Idea of "Roles" from old FreeBSD installers looks much better. >> Again, >> here are some "contrib" software which have one-to-one replacements in >> ports, like sendmail, ssh/sshd, ntpd, but split all other >> FreeBSD-specific code? Yes, debug. Yes, profile. Yes, static >> libraries. >> Yes, lib32 on 64 bit system. >> >> It seems that it is ideological ("holy war") discussion more than >> technical one... >> > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 07:55:12 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 784A0B14415; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:55:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from theraven@FreeBSD.org) Received: from theravensnest.org (theraven.freebsd.your.org [216.14.102.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "cloud.theravensnest.org", Issuer "StartCom Class 1 DV Server CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42F2E1D50; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:55:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from theraven@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [192.168.0.7] (cpc91230-cmbg18-2-0-cust661.5-4.cable.virginm.net [82.1.230.150]) (authenticated bits=0) by theravensnest.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u3J7sugQ020258 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:55:02 GMT (envelope-from theraven@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: theravensnest.org: Host cpc91230-cmbg18-2-0-cust661.5-4.cable.virginm.net [82.1.230.150] claimed to be [192.168.0.7] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) From: David Chisnall In-Reply-To: <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:54:48 +0100 Cc: Alfred Perlstein , lev@FreeBSD.org, Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn , Sean Fagan , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> To: Julian Elischer X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:55:12 -0000 On 19 Apr 2016, at 08:44, Julian Elischer wrote: >=20 >> All this can be done by meta-packages which depend on larger package = groups. > Currently Metapackage is a way to make 10 packages look like 11 = packages. The framework needs to understand to hide the 10 internal = packages if they are part of a metapackage. I agree, and patches to do this are very welcome. Currently, pkg is = short of contributors. I see basically three use cases for a packaged base: 1) People wanting a FreeBSD install to use as a server or workstation. = These people will install the FreeBSD 11 metapackage and not care that = it is a few hundred MBs. It would be nice if the pkg tool could present = this as a single package in list views, but that=E2=80=99s a UI issue = with pkg, not an issue with the number of packages in the base system. 2) People wanting to install embedded systems. Anyone who has tried to = run FreeBSD on a system with a small amount of flash storage will have = encountered the pain of having to use some kind of ad-hoc update. Being = able to manage updates to these systems with the same packaging tool as = you manage big systems is a big improvement. 3) People wanting to install service jails (sorry, containerised = applications). These want the smallest possible attack surface and so = want the smallest amount of the base system that they can have. Here, = small packages are an advantage. It will take a little while for ports = to learn enough about the granularity of the base system for this to = really be useful, but it would be great to be able to install nginx, for = example, in a jail and have only the handful of libraries that it needs. The big advantage of going with small packages initially, however, is = that it will allow us to get some data on what the correct groupings = are. If we have large packages, then it=E2=80=99s very hard to tell = which subsets of the packages people want. That=E2=80=99s exactly the = situation that we=E2=80=99re in now: we know some people don=E2=80=99t = want docs or games, but that=E2=80=99s about all that we know. It=E2=80=99= s easy to move to a model where we have *fewer* packages in the future, = but it=E2=80=99s harder to split them. That also applies to = dependencies. If I know that a port depends on the shell, then it=E2=80=99= s easy to update it from depending on a sh package to depending on a = core system utilities package automatically, but it=E2=80=99s very hard = to do an automatic update in the other direction. David From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 08:23:00 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D7E5B14FFE; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:23:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB0131CA3; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:22:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1asQw1-000Oiz-Qv; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:23:01 +0300 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:23:01 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: David Chisnall Cc: Julian Elischer , lev@FreeBSD.org, Alfred Perlstein , Glen Barber , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, Nathan Whitehorn Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <20160419082301.GE4841@zxy.spb.ru> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:23:00 -0000 On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 08:54:48AM +0100, David Chisnall wrote: > 2) People wanting to install embedded systems. Anyone who has tried > to run FreeBSD on a system with a small amount of flash storage will > have encountered the pain of having to use some kind of ad-hoc > update. Being able to manage updates to these systems with the same > packaging tool as you manage big systems is a big improvement. Not true. For very small system pkg overhead too high and comparable with size of base. NanoBSD anyway don't updated and build by pkg, only by slice swap. > 3) People wanting to install service jails (sorry, containerised > applications). These want the smallest possible attack surface and > so want the smallest amount of the base system that they can have. > Here, small packages are an advantage. It will take a little while > for ports to learn enough about the granularity of the base system > for this to really be useful, but it would be great to be able to > install nginx, for example, in a jail and have only the handful of > libraries that it needs. Too hard to work. nginx+ngx_lua need additional libraries, ngx_lua don't show additional dependeses, ports infrastructure don't tests this dependeses.... > > The big advantage of going with small packages initially, however, > is that it will allow us to get some data on what the correct > groupings are. If we have large packages, then it’s very hard to > tell which subsets of the packages people want. That’s exactly the > situation that we’re in now: we know some people don’t want docs or > games, but that’s about all that we know. It’s easy to move to a > model where we have *fewer* packages in the future, but it’s harder > to split them. That also applies to dependencies. If I know that a > port depends on the shell, then it’s easy to update it from > depending on a sh package to depending on a core system utilities > package automatically, but it’s very hard to do an automatic update > in the other direction. This is too teoretical. In pratical pepole don't want to waste for select from huge list of strange packaes. Also, systems may live after install and managed by different person. This person don't be grateful for docs and manuals absense. Writing docs and HOWTOS will be harder too: for every line you must be write "install package foo", "install package bar"... From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 09:25:59 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8432B12EE8; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:25:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan_partelly@rdsor.ro) Received: from mail.rdsor.ro (mail.rdsor.ro [193.231.238.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D86E13D9; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:25:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan_partelly@rdsor.ro) Received: from email.rdsor.ro (ftp.rdsor.ro [193.231.238.4]) by mail.rdsor.ro (Postfix) with ESMTP id 678F3DC0CD; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 12:17:52 +0300 (EEST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 12:18:00 +0300 From: dan_partelly To: Julian Elischer Cc: Alfred Perlstein , , Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn , Sean Fagan , , Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) In-Reply-To: <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> Message-ID: <4787f50d3f160e606ad55737e93a324a@rdsor.ro> X-Sender: dan_partelly@rdsor.ro User-Agent: RoundCube Webmail/0.4-beta X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:25:59 -0000 For what is worth, I agree with Julian Elischer. I do not want to see hundreds of packages over tenths of screen pages. Computers are supposed to make our life simpler. Human time is very expensive. CPU time, almost free. And this include that I really shouldn't have to think for usual work of any grep, sed , regexpes, pkg --leafs whatever. The default high level output of a tool like pkg should be as terse as possible. You guys seen the "Add remove programs" in Windows control panel ? Thats sane. Even now the default output of pkg borders insane, when you have many packages installed. 99% of my time I dont really care about lib-rtyum546.78.9. I care only less than 1% of my time when something goes wrong. The program | filter pipeline of Unix is very powerful. Whats more powerful is SANE DEFAULTS to make filters completely unnecessary. The open source Unix world has a lot to learn from Cupertino and Redmond. Keep things simple please. DO not pollute my screens with unnecessary information. When Ill want that info, Ill ask for it with a command line flag, then maybe filter it if necessary. On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:44:41 +0800, Julian Elischer wrote: > On 19/04/2016 5:29 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >> Guys please stop arguing about the number of packages. The high >> granularity is VERY useful! >> > it's going to make us a laughing stock > "look FreeBSD just split into 1.43 million packages" (effectively the > same number.. it's bigger than 10) > > >> Managing large groups of small packages is much easier than just >> having large packages. > err, Alfred, what planet do you live on? when they get out of sync it > becomes a nightmare. > If you also had a packaging system that was smart enough to manage a > hierarchy of packages then "maybe".. > >> >> All this can be done by meta-packages which depend on larger package >> groups. > Currently Metapackage is a way to make 10 packages look like 11 > packages. The framework needs to understand to hide the 10 internal > packages if they are part of a metapackage. >> >> Later pkg can be augmented to "remove packages not explicitly >> installed" which would remove leaf packages. >> >> Example: you installed "base-debug" which pulls in let's say 50 >> small packages, later you want all of those removed, you can do >> something like: "pkg delete --leafs base-debug" which should delete >> "base-debug" and any dangling packages it pulled in not required by >> other pkgs. >> >> Huge thanks to the team that implemented this! > > I'm sure the work was large and will be useful in the future but we > are not ready to have the system installed like this. > no-one wants to see 750 packages show up when you do an enquiry on a > newly installed system. > I could live with: > > base-utils 11.1 > - ktrace uninstalled > - tcpdump uninstalled > + dd 11.1.1 (CVE-123412 fix) > > > > but not > {700 packages ) > dd 11.1.1 dd with CVE fix > {29 more packages} > [tcpdump line is not present but you don't notice that] > {10 more packages} > [ktrace line would be here but you don't notice that either] > {15 more packages} > > > In other words, I have no objection to all the utilities coming in the > form of little packages. > but I have a major objection if that fact is at all obvious to the end > user, > and certainly if we need to wade through 750 packages to see what's going > on. > >> >> thanks. >> -Alfred >> >> On 4/18/16 1:07 PM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: >>> On 18.04.2016 22:40, Glen Barber wrote: >>> >>>> This granularity allows easy removal of things that may not be wanted >>>> (such as *-debug*, *-profile*, etc.) on systems with little >>>> storage. On >>>> one of my testing systems, I removed the tests packages and all debug >>>> and profiling, and the number of base system packages is 383. >>> IMHO, granularity like "all base debug", "all base profile" is >>> enough >>> for this. Really, I hardly could imagine why I will need only 1 >>> debug or >>> profile package, say, for csh. On resource-constrained systems NanoBSD >>> is much better anyway (for example, my typical NanoBSD installation is >>> 37MB base system, 12MB /boot and 10 packages), and on developer system >>> where you need profiled libraries it is Ok to install all of them and >>> don't think about 100 packages for them. >>> >>> Idea of "Roles" from old FreeBSD installers looks much better. >>> Again, >>> here are some "contrib" software which have one-to-one replacements in >>> ports, like sendmail, ssh/sshd, ntpd, but split all other >>> FreeBSD-specific code? Yes, debug. Yes, profile. Yes, static >>> libraries. >>> Yes, lib32 on 64 bit system. >>> >>> It seems that it is ideological ("holy war") discussion more than >>> technical one... >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list >> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >> "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 10:27:56 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8860BB1486D; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:27:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lars@e-new.0x20.net) Received: from mail.0x20.net (mail.0x20.net [217.69.76.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail.0x20.net", Issuer "mail.0x20.net" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FB531B27; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:27:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lars@e-new.0x20.net) Received: from e-new.0x20.net (mail.0x20.net [IPv6:2001:aa8:fffb:1::3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.0x20.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE0BF6E0081; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 12:27:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from e-new.0x20.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by e-new.0x20.net (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id u3JARquB077740; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 12:27:52 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from lars@e-new.0x20.net) Received: (from lars@localhost) by e-new.0x20.net (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id u3JARpna077438; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 12:27:51 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from lars) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 12:27:51 +0200 From: Lars Engels To: dan_partelly Cc: Julian Elischer , Alfred Perlstein , lev@FreeBSD.org, Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn , Sean Fagan , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <20160419102751.GM82927@e-new.0x20.net> Mail-Followup-To: Lars Engels , dan_partelly , Julian Elischer , Alfred Perlstein , lev@FreeBSD.org, Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn , Sean Fagan , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> <4787f50d3f160e606ad55737e93a324a@rdsor.ro> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="mkHYMT4O8DyWoHkb" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4787f50d3f160e606ad55737e93a324a@rdsor.ro> X-Editor: VIM - Vi IMproved 7.4 X-Operation-System: FreeBSD 8.4-RELEASE-p23 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:27:56 -0000 --mkHYMT4O8DyWoHkb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 12:18:00PM +0300, dan_partelly wrote: >=20 > be as terse as possible. You guys seen the "Add remove programs" > in Windows control panel ? Thats sane. Even now the default output =20 > of pkg borders insane, when you have many packages installed. 99% of my > time > I dont really care about lib-rtyum546.78.9. I care only less than 1% of my > time when something=20 > goes wrong.=20 Don't use "pkg info" then. Use "pkg leaf": % pkg info | wc -l 249 % pkg leaf | wc -l 25 "leaf" is an alias for: pkg 'query -e "%a =3D=3D 0" "%n-%v"' And to everyone complaining about the number of packages: How many of you have actually used the packaged base? --mkHYMT4O8DyWoHkb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQF8BAEBCgBmBQJXFggnXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ4RjQwMDE3RTRERjUzMTI1N0FGRTUxNDlF NTRDQjM3RDNBMDg5RDZEAAoJEOVMs306CJ1tbAYH/i0yagmypWg+RUKQsTGWg+An hWyFArEGrnLZA71qacmu9hceJL+jMMDIuYTDG5VoMtVctU9xM8EhyuHQ8x7diqCo MS/mfkuPRG319g7/5qkAdmPQYA1DyhRdfpZA4tzWHd9hvu/AvtrJ2HSe6DQbO3g2 aP97b8rfIwT42D7dmBelPXMK+Jt8WhGN+S8EiqQJrsNsvooh0a8LudWTS4+Z/lpO FwE1JTqcOI/VIg1OrhwxDsffX5p8m1Yz5L/i7+ValO8dO/xlxAaR9qhgtqtczwTv hCCjeZYwW8H8bmgHoI6B6HcHmsPg12HvUzKsbcpaDAop58PPrp0CXbyYLFyxRxk= =EMnC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --mkHYMT4O8DyWoHkb-- From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 11:06:36 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94662B13B62; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:06:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from etnapierala@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wm0-x241.google.com (mail-wm0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3AC3A1150; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:06:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from etnapierala@gmail.com) Received: by mail-wm0-x241.google.com with SMTP id l6so4098077wml.3; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 04:06:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=x1ymEBMHpeCsbf5v/d71FArGvW0OltRXNRg4APSZ/Mw=; b=Ir/Y5UbvpBfZBvmyHe3/NyqF4vBs9TQNg8hH/spVz42g5kDcabwQJX9eJHSpedw+Oj CqQFEinW/REnZqpblk+QCYc3oJfShFLQGRFynxcVJNLQ2hh42WRhHeMqWTrwLck1QTwe cBnMS8MddXzmfAyLEeQOXQL5UU5xUed1Gd2YAuLf2YO3fjdm6wtuFs8S2TWmJNML3toT kg9CryTDmHS+76PYaEYj1t+gMsEhuCIGhTQWXGSH62GIC48kyx7LiEKfAAuOulGJoG40 YMVMHeE2PC261xvKDPkGbaWx02BOweGVCbD+zMAzX1PJyIO6L5NofHtA1hdS3SyfS5T1 UvZA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=x1ymEBMHpeCsbf5v/d71FArGvW0OltRXNRg4APSZ/Mw=; b=DBkH2Tg/+915t2RI9eeD+DX1OdOkp8mHvj5gt0mbTD3/4TZ5rudUBB8FPnH8Rm7P// EoeLdbcr3EXVkJYrQo2AvZYHEuDDWv0BDJOcboE43VfXXpQwvp+hTlzk6uMS86NCAmBF cUWIxnE9OzaDP503PyF44hvUFGIS2jxZ6oZb6GH9k4hBAJlnhZ+Sv/E2mjICCxOKDXRy ys31NKgXI2gjIPDhqFtJaEfjXXblVur3wj7/fFCMFM+fDXBYgMHDHenxuQmUwGtQR8fu +fG6482tAkZ/8ws89dFvyaciOhf3KDkO11QvorzcfEEgiTfxN4RaZxZfVna6rRTkQeiO Tlmg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FUGc8BZ8khaj1oFJhxl+upjQlJqE8jjBlo8nqv4pk+6vsVElU/tOYbVcDkklabZjA== X-Received: by 10.28.142.197 with SMTP id q188mr25052245wmd.52.1461063994829; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 04:06:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brick.home (abpy245.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl. [83.8.66.245]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g141sm3780721wme.0.2016.04.19.04.06.33 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 19 Apr 2016 04:06:34 -0700 (PDT) Sender: =?UTF-8?Q?Edward_Tomasz_Napiera=C5=82a?= Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:06:31 +0200 From: Edward Tomasz =?utf-8?Q?Napiera=C5=82a?= To: Lev Serebryakov Cc: Glen Barber , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <20160419110631.GD5543@brick.home> Mail-Followup-To: Lev Serebryakov , Glen Barber , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:06:36 -0000 [replying to random post] I have a weird feeling that the main problem with having a lot of packages is that people have bad experiences from other systems. But IMHO the root cause of those problems was not that you had a lot of packages - the root cause was that it was used by distro guys to strip basic functionality off from the system, forcing users and administrators to manually install stuff like scp(1), compiler toolchain, dozens of packages containing includes, or even the separate package with basic man pages. Now, in this case none of this is going to happen. FreeBSD base is staying the way it was. If you want to customize the system, you can do it in a sane way by removing packages, but you don't have to. As for the 'multipage "pkg info" output problem' - on the laptop I'm typing this on there are 1351 packages installed. Packaging base will increase it by about half. And then I'll be hopefully able to remove lpr(1) binaries that conflict with CUPS. And sendmail. From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 11:30:06 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 759F7B147A0; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:30:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan_partelly@rdsor.ro) Received: from mail.rdsor.ro (mail.rdsor.ro [193.231.238.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF088114D; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:30:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan_partelly@rdsor.ro) Received: from email.rdsor.ro (ftp.rdsor.ro [193.231.238.4]) by mail.rdsor.ro (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3541D8802; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:30:03 +0300 (EEST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:30:13 +0300 From: dan_partelly To: Lars Engels Cc: Julian Elischer , Alfred Perlstein , , Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn , Sean Fagan , , Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) In-Reply-To: <20160419102751.GM82927@e-new.0x20.net> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> <4787f50d3f160e606ad55737e93a324a@rdsor.ro> <20160419102751.GM82927@e-new.0x20.net> Message-ID: <317dbdbb2c31c17ad70ef213abdcdbf6@rdsor.ro> X-Sender: dan_partelly@rdsor.ro User-Agent: RoundCube Webmail/0.4-beta X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:30:06 -0000 I dont know if you missed the point of my message on purpose or not. I never pretended that you can't extract that information. I maintain that having sane defaults would empower me to almost never care about aliases, scripts pipes, filter , regular expressions and what not. It is great that all this power is at my fingertips, in case something goes awfully wrong , not so great when Im forced to use it. And I really don't see how this helps anyway, since number of leafs will increase anyway with package base. Let me reiterate, perhaps clearer this time: It is my opinion that sane defaults beat ANY script, obscure command line arguments, alias, pipe, filter, helper program. > > Don't use "pkg info" then. Use "pkg leaf": > > And to everyone complaining about the number of packages: How many of > you have actually used the packaged base? This question is irrelevant. 1.First of all, many people consider packaging base a great accomplishment, yet maybe not ready for prime-time, given the current way pkg handles this information. I personally love the idea, with the caveats above. 2. The issue is present with all meta-packages in general. The base packaging only exacerbate an existing issue with the sheer number of packages it presents. From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 10:50:07 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9B6BB133C8; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:50:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82EB01779; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:50:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1asTEL-0002Cz-9y; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:50:05 +0300 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:50:05 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Lars Engels , dan_partelly , Julian Elischer , Alfred Perlstein , lev@FreeBSD.org, Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn , Sean Fagan , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <20160419105005.GG4841@zxy.spb.ru> References: <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> <4787f50d3f160e606ad55737e93a324a@rdsor.ro> <20160419102751.GM82927@e-new.0x20.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160419102751.GM82927@e-new.0x20.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:37:46 +0000 X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:50:07 -0000 On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 12:27:51PM +0200, Lars Engels wrote: > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 12:18:00PM +0300, dan_partelly wrote: > > > > be as terse as possible. You guys seen the "Add remove programs" > > in Windows control panel ? Thats sane. Even now the default output > > of pkg borders insane, when you have many packages installed. 99% of my > > time > > I dont really care about lib-rtyum546.78.9. I care only less than 1% of my > > time when something > > goes wrong. > > Don't use "pkg info" then. Use "pkg leaf": > > % pkg info | wc -l > 249 > % pkg leaf | wc -l > 25 > > "leaf" is an alias for: > pkg 'query -e "%a == 0" "%n-%v"' slw@pkg-test:~ % pkg leaf | wc -l 1 slw@pkg-test:~ % pkg leaf pkg-1.7.2 slw@pkg-test:~ % pkg info | wc -l 756 > And to everyone complaining about the number of packages: How many of > you have actually used the packaged base? Wrong question: I am already complain about Xorg spliting. Some servers managed by me have 53 packages, included 29 as p5-libwww. From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 13:54:39 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B142B14B27 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:54:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from matthew@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk [IPv6:2001:8b0:151:1:c4ea:bd49:619b:6cb3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9834C144D for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:54:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from matthew@FreeBSD.org) Received: from zero-gravitas.local (unknown [85.199.232.226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) by smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A9EED110B2 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:54:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk; dmarc=none header.from=FreeBSD.org Authentication-Results: smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk/A9EED110B2; dkim=none; dkim-atps=neutral Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> From: Matthew Seaman Message-ID: <571638B9.6020904@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:55:05 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="xvDNbrOug7QtN1jE6DMjWguGMEARtNtat" X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.1 at smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RDNS_NONE, SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:54:39 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --xvDNbrOug7QtN1jE6DMjWguGMEARtNtat Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="gK3hsJdxn4HHx6pI73L7VsEcfCcHUFEVn" From: Matthew Seaman To: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Message-ID: <571638B9.6020904@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: --gK3hsJdxn4HHx6pI73L7VsEcfCcHUFEVn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2016/04/19 08:54, David Chisnall wrote: > The big advantage of going with small packages initially, however, is > that it will allow us to get some data on what the correct groupings > are. If we have large packages, then it=E2=80=99s very hard to tell wh= ich > subsets of the packages people want. That=E2=80=99s exactly the situat= ion > that we=E2=80=99re in now: we know some people don=E2=80=99t want docs = or games, but > that=E2=80=99s about all that we know. It=E2=80=99s easy to move to a = model where we > have *fewer* packages in the future, but it=E2=80=99s harder to split t= hem. > That also applies to dependencies. If I know that a port depends on > the shell, then it=E2=80=99s easy to update it from depending on a sh p= ackage > to depending on a core system utilities package automatically, but > it=E2=80=99s very hard to do an automatic update in the other direction= =2E Exactly. Bapt's talks[+] about the design decisions behind how base was divided up into packages explain very clearly why the situation now is as it is. Basically *any* way of dividing up the base system into packages would raise the hackles of some subset of the user base. So he chose to create a large number of small packages for maximum flexibility and also supply a range of different meta-packages allowing installation of various useful package sets as a simple operation. The current base package builds don't actually include those meta-packages yet, so it's impossible to say right now how that will work out. Yes, this is the first attempt at creating a package hierarchy for base, and it's going to be buggy. The way things are set up should mean that those bugs are only annoyances, and not show stoppers. Complaining purely about the /number/ of packages the base is divided into is not productive: certainly there are some packages that could be merged or otherwise eliminated, but until people come up with concrete proposals about the details of doing that, little progress is going to be made. Yes, I agree that the way pkg(8) displays the package data certainly could be improved. The base packaging setup actually implements a idea we have been talking about with reference to the ports tree: that is 'sub-packages.'[*] What's missing is a neat way of displaying and handling a package that consists of a collection of sub-packages; at the moment they're all shown as completely independent packages, which works as far as the mechanics of installing and maintaining your server but doesn't necessarily give the best user experience. Cheers, Matthew [+] https://youtu.be/Br6izhH5P1I?list=3DPLWW0CjV-TafY0NqFDvD4k31CtnX-CGn8= f [*] So that one port could compile into several different packages, including separate pkg blobs for docs, examples, shared libraries, debugging symbols, C/C++ header files, various different extras enabled by options settings and (not least) the actual program binaries or scripts. By default you'ld get all of the above simply by installing the top-level package -- which would result in the same filesystem content as when using the existing monolithic packages. However you could install or delete any of those sub-packages separately as required. Means, for instance, you could install multiple different ABI versions of a shared library simultaneously, something you can't do nicely with either ports or packages today unless there's some special hack to allow it. --gK3hsJdxn4HHx6pI73L7VsEcfCcHUFEVn-- --xvDNbrOug7QtN1jE6DMjWguGMEARtNtat Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJXFji/XxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQxOUYxNTRFQ0JGMTEyRTUwNTQ0RTNGMzAw MDUxM0YxMEUwQTlFNEU3AAoJEABRPxDgqeTnfMoQAJqMApO6l+DvwYDmBMADsWbL mSJhVY7/d/p0t7E3laKIlBa7AWxqeNy7h/0PwbK/s3h3H0YdbvmIj3PCM1oAQyBW nqopo4j4KA5/0PwptQ8pjs/Hv2P0B9Oj8htWKgHsfuRLO8h7L3dBNF/tp/lhCzCf vyIiq0AM7H1eJVcxpQYnEfBoPrt5H/518HSGUUgBqL2HvYGnojF/veg3ywqxZ/bg pjay2S0nGeoxI3xDIphOICXqIIDp4mljoq0e4TJT0E6Fr6MJCh2J95fMe3AwjjFR 7Rr5DZdrvvRK1TVYPPd/yHYN8bB00pCGWG005zmqZcKhwrkkxDG66gkbr6hJ5cc1 s13yXhV3BEusKDtNMUFMTiO40UL4b/VM/RK8a+PDN4V8KqbqT3gCkYW4oGccpeLw uLsXqrMlyC320Lkoz0eOIwtTU0NmrnjN3AGkbNa2jFUXzqO4KNj/FRmhoKlsffya GIpzd3L+jQSQ0aKYU+PADFM7MS8c+D4vWbx+H0nwoO9IjPXSwFJ0yQciD2ndzB2g punL27HC98Ss5f+1uVTATiu1H2eZUt2RtYEGgl6YPDBDt375eQS3dOdDY3ESNH44 Cfrg7iXmtArmmvp0YYli0gu2twrGiLdQR7mcY5vyIusWfPIvOcoOuMOcMitPacwc 3HglCT13EVwAy/6DanjF =Lnux -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --xvDNbrOug7QtN1jE6DMjWguGMEARtNtat-- From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 14:27:53 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3336B13AAA; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:27:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alfred@freebsd.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [IPv6:2001:470:1f05:b76::196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE3C71DB2; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:27:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alfred@freebsd.org) Received: from Alfreds-MacBook-Pro-2.local (unknown [IPv6:2601:645:8003:a4d6:8899:e9c:e753:74e4]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 527C6346DFA0; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:27:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: Julian Elischer , lev@FreeBSD.org, Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> Cc: Sean Fagan , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Alfred Perlstein Organization: FreeBSD Message-ID: <57164068.8080800@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:27:52 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:27:54 -0000 Again, the point is that those objecting should put aside the time to implement what you (and I) are suggesting: > I could live with: > > base-utils 11.1 > - ktrace uninstalled > - tcpdump uninstalled > + dd 11.1.1 (CVE-123412 fix) > > > > but not > {700 packages ) > dd 11.1.1 dd with CVE fix > {29 more packages} > [tcpdump line is not present but you don't notice that] > {10 more packages} > [ktrace line would be here but you don't notice that either] > {15 more packages} What should not happen is that this incremental step forward be blocked by those unwilling to hash out the next steps. -Alfred On 4/19/16 12:44 AM, Julian Elischer wrote: > On 19/04/2016 5:29 AM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >> Guys please stop arguing about the number of packages. The high >> granularity is VERY useful! >> > it's going to make us a laughing stock > "look FreeBSD just split into 1.43 million packages" (effectively the > same number.. it's bigger than 10) > > >> Managing large groups of small packages is much easier than just >> having large packages. > err, Alfred, what planet do you live on? when they get out of sync it > becomes a nightmare. > If you also had a packaging system that was smart enough to manage a > hierarchy of packages then "maybe".. > >> >> All this can be done by meta-packages which depend on larger package >> groups. > Currently Metapackage is a way to make 10 packages look like 11 > packages. The framework needs to understand to hide the 10 internal > packages if they are part of a metapackage. >> >> Later pkg can be augmented to "remove packages not explicitly >> installed" which would remove leaf packages. >> >> Example: you installed "base-debug" which pulls in let's say 50 small >> packages, later you want all of those removed, you can do something >> like: "pkg delete --leafs base-debug" which should delete >> "base-debug" and any dangling packages it pulled in not required by >> other pkgs. >> >> Huge thanks to the team that implemented this! > > I'm sure the work was large and will be useful in the future but we > are not ready to have the system installed like this. > no-one wants to see 750 packages show up when you do an enquiry on a > newly installed system. > I could live with: > > base-utils 11.1 > - ktrace uninstalled > - tcpdump uninstalled > + dd 11.1.1 (CVE-123412 fix) > > > > but not > {700 packages ) > dd 11.1.1 dd with CVE fix > {29 more packages} > [tcpdump line is not present but you don't notice that] > {10 more packages} > [ktrace line would be here but you don't notice that either] > {15 more packages} > > > In other words, I have no objection to all the utilities coming in the > form of little packages. > but I have a major objection if that fact is at all obvious to the end > user, > and certainly if we need to wade through 750 packages to see what's > going on. > >> >> thanks. >> -Alfred >> >> On 4/18/16 1:07 PM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: >>> On 18.04.2016 22:40, Glen Barber wrote: >>> >>>> This granularity allows easy removal of things that may not be wanted >>>> (such as *-debug*, *-profile*, etc.) on systems with little >>>> storage. On >>>> one of my testing systems, I removed the tests packages and all debug >>>> and profiling, and the number of base system packages is 383. >>> IMHO, granularity like "all base debug", "all base profile" is enough >>> for this. Really, I hardly could imagine why I will need only 1 >>> debug or >>> profile package, say, for csh. On resource-constrained systems NanoBSD >>> is much better anyway (for example, my typical NanoBSD installation is >>> 37MB base system, 12MB /boot and 10 packages), and on developer system >>> where you need profiled libraries it is Ok to install all of them and >>> don't think about 100 packages for them. >>> >>> Idea of "Roles" from old FreeBSD installers looks much better. Again, >>> here are some "contrib" software which have one-to-one replacements in >>> ports, like sendmail, ssh/sshd, ntpd, but split all other >>> FreeBSD-specific code? Yes, debug. Yes, profile. Yes, static libraries. >>> Yes, lib32 on 64 bit system. >>> >>> It seems that it is ideological ("holy war") discussion more than >>> technical one... >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list >> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >> "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> > From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 14:33:02 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F592B13E80; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:33:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2804A1699; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:33:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1asWi2-00089U-DU; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 17:32:58 +0300 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 17:32:58 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Alfred Perlstein Cc: Julian Elischer , lev@FreeBSD.org, Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <20160419143258.GH4841@zxy.spb.ru> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> <57164068.8080800@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <57164068.8080800@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:33:02 -0000 On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 07:27:52AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > Again, the point is that those objecting should put aside the time to > implement what you (and I) are suggesting: > > > I could live with: > > > > base-utils 11.1 > > - ktrace uninstalled > > - tcpdump uninstalled > > + dd 11.1.1 (CVE-123412 fix) > > > > > > > > but not > > {700 packages ) > > dd 11.1.1 dd with CVE fix > > {29 more packages} > > [tcpdump line is not present but you don't notice that] > > {10 more packages} > > [ktrace line would be here but you don't notice that either] > > {15 more packages} > > What should not happen is that this incremental step forward be blocked > by those unwilling to hash out the next steps. Teoretical. In practical this is happen with me. From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 14:33:31 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC583B13F7B; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:33:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alfred@freebsd.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [IPv6:2001:470:1f05:b76::196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87FB5184D; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:33:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alfred@freebsd.org) Received: from Alfreds-MacBook-Pro-2.local (unknown [IPv6:2601:645:8003:a4d6:8899:e9c:e753:74e4]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 408C0346DF90; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:33:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: David Chisnall , Julian Elischer References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> Cc: lev@FreeBSD.org, Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn , Sean Fagan , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Alfred Perlstein Organization: FreeBSD Message-ID: <571641BA.8010205@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:33:30 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:33:31 -0000 It is very important to understand that a packaged base is extremely useful for those building any sort of distro or appliance distro. So although the concept of "user serviceable" is important, it's not just that. Such a change makes it easy for a distro or appliance making to cherry pick updates to the system without having to pull the entire system forward. One of the huge pains about using FreeBSD at my last work was that the base system as a whole was a bit challenging to pry apart so that an incremental update could happen. Let's say I needed a patch to openssl, well that was HARD even for me. My choices were to update the whole system (which broke things), pull in patches and apply them (hard and scary), figure out a way to pull it from ports instead... super hard as "base" built before ports in "nanobsd". Quite frankly I didn't have the time for it. As someone who laid the foundation for an FreeBSD appliance, I wholeheartedly welcome this, it will be HUGE for appliance builders. I am also confident that we will very easily sort out how to make "micropackages" or some such mechanism within at most 3 months after the code lands. The reason why is because I already see some excellent proposals for such mechanisms in this thread. -Alfred On 4/19/16 12:54 AM, David Chisnall wrote: > On 19 Apr 2016, at 08:44, Julian Elischer wrote: >>> All this can be done by meta-packages which depend on larger package groups. >> Currently Metapackage is a way to make 10 packages look like 11 packages. The framework needs to understand to hide the 10 internal packages if they are part of a metapackage. > I agree, and patches to do this are very welcome. Currently, pkg is short of contributors. > > I see basically three use cases for a packaged base: > > 1) People wanting a FreeBSD install to use as a server or workstation. These people will install the FreeBSD 11 metapackage and not care that it is a few hundred MBs. It would be nice if the pkg tool could present this as a single package in list views, but that’s a UI issue with pkg, not an issue with the number of packages in the base system. > > 2) People wanting to install embedded systems. Anyone who has tried to run FreeBSD on a system with a small amount of flash storage will have encountered the pain of having to use some kind of ad-hoc update. Being able to manage updates to these systems with the same packaging tool as you manage big systems is a big improvement. > > 3) People wanting to install service jails (sorry, containerised applications). These want the smallest possible attack surface and so want the smallest amount of the base system that they can have. Here, small packages are an advantage. It will take a little while for ports to learn enough about the granularity of the base system for this to really be useful, but it would be great to be able to install nginx, for example, in a jail and have only the handful of libraries that it needs. > > The big advantage of going with small packages initially, however, is that it will allow us to get some data on what the correct groupings are. If we have large packages, then it’s very hard to tell which subsets of the packages people want. That’s exactly the situation that we’re in now: we know some people don’t want docs or games, but that’s about all that we know. It’s easy to move to a model where we have *fewer* packages in the future, but it’s harder to split them. That also applies to dependencies. If I know that a port depends on the shell, then it’s easy to update it from depending on a sh package to depending on a core system utilities package automatically, but it’s very hard to do an automatic update in the other direction. > > David > From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 14:39:27 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AA2DB1429E; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:39:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan_partelly@rdsor.ro) Received: from mail.rdsor.ro (mail.rdsor.ro [193.231.238.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5276D1CE1; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:39:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan_partelly@rdsor.ro) Received: from email.rdsor.ro (ftp.rdsor.ro [193.231.238.4]) by mail.rdsor.ro (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EE71232E5; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 17:39:25 +0300 (EEST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 17:39:37 +0300 From: dan_partelly To: Alfred Perlstein Cc: Julian Elischer , , Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn , Sean Fagan , , Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) In-Reply-To: <57164068.8080800@freebsd.org> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> <57164068.8080800@freebsd.org> Message-ID: <78fb431d2d9b568fd488fae51a1b5f23@rdsor.ro> X-Sender: dan_partelly@rdsor.ro User-Agent: RoundCube Webmail/0.4-beta X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:39:27 -0000 > > What should not happen is that this incremental step forward be blocked > by those unwilling to hash out the next steps. > > -Alfred > > While incremental steps forward are great, how do you avoid situations like VNET, where a "good enough" enough implementation, usable in some scenarios lingered for years in kernel, but to this day it suffers from leaks and bugs. Once you go down the path of enabling it in this state, chances are that it will stay that way for more than half a decade. From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 14:41:46 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2BCCB14592; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:41:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alfred@freebsd.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A37791F95; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:41:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alfred@freebsd.org) Received: from Alfreds-MacBook-Pro-2.local (unknown [IPv6:2601:645:8003:a4d6:8899:e9c:e753:74e4]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BAC58346DE30; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:41:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: dan_partelly References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> <57164068.8080800@freebsd.org> <78fb431d2d9b568fd488fae51a1b5f23@rdsor.ro> Cc: Julian Elischer , lev@FreeBSD.org, Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn , Sean Fagan , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Alfred Perlstein Organization: FreeBSD Message-ID: <571643A8.9020702@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:41:44 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <78fb431d2d9b568fd488fae51a1b5f23@rdsor.ro> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 14:41:47 -0000 On 4/19/16 7:39 AM, dan_partelly wrote: >> What should not happen is that this incremental step forward be blocked >> by those unwilling to hash out the next steps. >> >> -Alfred >> >> > While incremental steps forward are great, how do you avoid situations > like VNET, where a "good enough" enough implementation, usable in some > scenarios lingered for years in kernel, but to this day it suffers from > leaks and bugs. Once you go down the path of enabling it in this state, > chances are that it will stay that way for more than half a decade. > > > > > We happened to use VNET at our last company with great success. Had it not existed we would have been much further away from our goals. Maybe you picked a bad example? :) Look, take a look at history and the Linux kernel threads story and its impact on FreeBSD. If you'd like I can talk about it. -Alfred From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 15:05:51 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B350EB131CA for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:05:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from garga.bsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qg0-x22e.google.com (mail-qg0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6FBCC1302 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:05:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from garga.bsd@gmail.com) Received: by mail-qg0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id v14so10583022qge.0 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:05:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:from:content-transfer-encoding:subject:message-id:date:to :mime-version; bh=cAlbIPRyIX20ai7ZvE8jcB19mBwlbN5gmohAOjVCdtg=; b=VWZ38KzYmMMn1yeE+uZCCy5AAa/q3KXGE6TXecyFAnaAoJBxRjsYzwmRTms7UDjnCU zpmcZtGwdKlRRvEM+cEeSckQiVp4pNBr6xeVQhHqpM3Q2Rdw7MCIEqCw6BT8qjueiKG0 hB+Frz38l5c49QsZyBUoEI12fu8SatlOG3wakmwEfIMkDZTlAzN/x4ni4XWJ0HotD+5E Bd8XEaylpUfA1A3doyoUDYh6K3AdIaYeZUzkMqtMHNXPoSY0PPgIKTQF0dYisA1q20oh ORh4fxlK5hMXP1MUjda3wI0wsOGoFx0VYnItqaGqh2C741wXb9KRjBiRbQr0/UGtal8K 8zrg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:content-transfer-encoding:subject :message-id:date:to:mime-version; bh=cAlbIPRyIX20ai7ZvE8jcB19mBwlbN5gmohAOjVCdtg=; b=lBh/MJdnUcYaBcpRaaUQLt3O3twBpdlwYqW9WjLxXRwtKNspzJdgX29OULXIci5VUl bQUhYLF7uFl+513x9FGY615rN9ZDz6fYw/ODnfbbOBl727wUbEnvRMCOvYP47XdPMOKr +xpfuZ51NDrp3aMh6Gak+gdLCufaqWMNwILZa9iG6sLGpXEOEVWgrVbl215rgJLpxPNc cddAeoVJxPGqNLEgFvNPGQZCIcI5q7BbnF5XDkbZUzTS/fPg61zEE9Vas/vRUCwrbPrx i6I7ibngPTlKk/fL8epqnSgjE4Kt242hieQ6YNEdqyTtPPdKdW7KOqqek7L0FdTpYB6W Q0vw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXWeIk+3qnDAhXGu96kfyW5vtqXMqLQHl23rW3z6ZgWMFXNJOLBWQylpY6e5ewq9Q== X-Received: by 10.140.201.143 with SMTP id w137mr4333233qha.27.1461078350564; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:05:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mbp.home (179-125-133-13.desktop.com.br. [179.125.133.13]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 76sm28835905qhs.21.2016.04.19.08.05.48 for (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:05:49 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Renato Botelho From: Renato Botelho Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: /etc/rc is missing Message-Id: <86DCCBA7-4B1B-4A9B-955E-43DEE12A2104@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 12:05:47 -0300 To: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:05:51 -0000 I=E2=80=99m doing some tests and noted /etc/rc is not part of any = package. -- Renato Botelho From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 15:42:31 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01FFCB1438A; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:42:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org) Received: from onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru [148.251.9.81]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B99C01AD8; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:42:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [89.113.128.32]) (Authenticated sender: lev@serebryakov.spb.ru) by onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 47B4E952; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 18:42:28 +0300 (MSK) Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> To: Glen Barber , Sean Fagan Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org From: Lev Serebryakov Organization: FreeBSD Message-ID: <571651DE.1070807@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 18:42:22 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ljeGP4pLEkUplE7HT7CMpXWChhljabSEQ" X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:42:31 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --ljeGP4pLEkUplE7HT7CMpXWChhljabSEQ Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="snq2bEvOeA5uC7M6m1JPhPP9cHOHA7FWf" From: Lev Serebryakov Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org To: Glen Barber , Sean Fagan Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Message-ID: <571651DE.1070807@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> --snq2bEvOeA5uC7M6m1JPhPP9cHOHA7FWf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 18.04.2016 22:14, Glen Barber wrote: >>> I understand, that maybe it is too late, but ARE YOU KIDDING?! 755 >>> packages?! WHY?! What are reasons and goals to split base in such >>> enormous number of packages? >> >> Just a guess, having done the same thing myself: it means that update= s can be >> more targeted. >> > This is exactly the reason, which has been answered numerous times. Does somebody noticed, that it looks broken now: https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2016-April/060687.htm= l https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2016-April/060690.htm= l And it is exactly concern: it hard to notice such breakage, as there is hundreds of packages. --=20 // Lev Serebryakov --snq2bEvOeA5uC7M6m1JPhPP9cHOHA7FWf-- --ljeGP4pLEkUplE7HT7CMpXWChhljabSEQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJXFlHjXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRGOTZEMUNBMEI1RjQzMThCNjc0QjMzMEFF QUIwM0M1OEJGREM0NzhGAAoJEOqwPFi/3EeP+3UP/3KxP8m4aAZWdg37Jg9MVfdB FO/tvICziZZhLigN7HLvbRKJgSibJEQrmO/85AjRtYjXbIpq7Be6fqhPaPcManjS fan5RVgBSk2te6K42gyy7R4HvK9pTvPJ4UAR2nRcFBXt6xKmrujQ3WMp01YspdKW AmfrJr+nbPiQ2lHcM1LtBJkLq/xmV763Gu6VzCOIvvlpFfGlS3mp5L94mLU0Xlzz pzh8n53S7MsWPRCgUGekgXbYsauowqdFRqqpWNFoW3kbKVSwHgs02/C6PFfhMhS5 2/Ownx8tseZcTtyZ4eJb8BM/pFBdhXJ08HMFDY/Pt5m7s7g+UMHIHycoAF5Y3QIp Z5o24cgFaQgcfAA1AAwCfLXwfHnb+wboek966ONknuvh78nJLA41B7RYMhApqFFS q5De3mwAG7AKxnU8U/quTsWyzIEPPyFFL6tNJ33w2/NjgS4TkxxsiBt90DLawzNV YVvaSwrN6dR0OJNR3m2wCFrLM1WIHEebCXUxMLfpIwZVxiYs5vagYR5t8UaYc2zX A6aOA1DbHtiJtPS9cRdHNgbm6Yh5yr/eLdQaHz4bPpt6CavZMpt9/7rR03n26lMM TvpzTn7mdnHl01SJ41isjIAKLNeDVx7FzDBi5DYUnVL17vvxxGqeHZMi1jw5IjGt buMR2vJX2esRN11+0TFr =zFmb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ljeGP4pLEkUplE7HT7CMpXWChhljabSEQ-- From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 15:46:12 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C602B1469E; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:46:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org) Received: from onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru [148.251.9.81]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9263F1116; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:46:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [89.113.128.32]) (Authenticated sender: lev@serebryakov.spb.ru) by onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F30EC95A; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 18:46:09 +0300 (MSK) Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> <571641BA.8010205@freebsd.org> To: Alfred Perlstein , David Chisnall , Julian Elischer Cc: Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn , Sean Fagan , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Lev Serebryakov Organization: FreeBSD Message-ID: <571652C2.8040106@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 18:46:10 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <571641BA.8010205@freebsd.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="74Gjv9Xtq6aWjqCwB6g6s7gWvCOLpfa28" X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:46:12 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --74Gjv9Xtq6aWjqCwB6g6s7gWvCOLpfa28 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="k8xGD2h7COWPBDCBvnFdCbEffmxDKD7Fp" From: Lev Serebryakov Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org To: Alfred Perlstein , David Chisnall , Julian Elischer Cc: Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn , Sean Fagan , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Message-ID: <571652C2.8040106@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> <571641BA.8010205@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <571641BA.8010205@freebsd.org> --k8xGD2h7COWPBDCBvnFdCbEffmxDKD7Fp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 19.04.2016 17:33, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > I am also confident that we will very easily sort out how to make > "micropackages" or some such mechanism within at most 3 months after th= e > code lands. The reason why is because I already see some excellent > proposals for such mechanisms in this thread. I could see only two proposals: meta-packages (which is not a solution, but kludge, IMHO) from numerous people and proposal from Slawa about "overlapped" and "file-removal" packages, which is not discussed at all (https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2016-April/060688.ht= ml). I really like Slawa approach, but it requires much more sophisticated pkg, including additional metadata, etc. --=20 // Lev Serebryakov --k8xGD2h7COWPBDCBvnFdCbEffmxDKD7Fp-- --74Gjv9Xtq6aWjqCwB6g6s7gWvCOLpfa28 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJXFlLCXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRGOTZEMUNBMEI1RjQzMThCNjc0QjMzMEFF QUIwM0M1OEJGREM0NzhGAAoJEOqwPFi/3EePoTUQAMCCWqY/onXzIYefamja7OUY YGXrj/v2BjZLOlVTMWl606ntFqNpA8tRxQ1skNewo/V/Y/7pD2m1JCvjhM9OtABj M2Zm0/bTkykixp64z1N9CN8Y2eHPlJx4nE3dmG5R9OaqQKpBuVpxPTxPVkilWXxH nDlLYoAaaDgygBV+qFRi0DjvB3pOGe1eb/utAUo+CaPVXAI8es/wVsiKQEDZ5g/g WuPRI81Y608Aiv1JaETzLHFmfMmtN6H6PDl0IDTZ7tmvafTd+p/inxKKzqaeR+Ik kVqI+u+1agjHxpMTuj3uP/AVjIAkWE1e/fWXstRFRfmvclcEA0BM3PDNSvSlIsUS 4Nv4yK4RZYANqzvRI65nR9v7/5qbPaNU0K9lc4IWAIOKcarC5bNJUF+MfzWIHaqI B1HFcpOgw4D4CCUjrOkTYTeJNJ4cBgC5rP9oKvnNB+OK05qbQNs1valtofdAp78g LCyDerJOkYmH0C99TdUp802kNe/rMATKb4grgKbDdomLB6SellwMuZNxwd9LHkPf u7g96yENpZd1FVei8Q+xOnSrAe/d/mauc3GzigoV95Leq9taDyXfC4Yu7Mn6CJqv vrQeD5f/cd1sC6U30f8xf+NtIt/xyS2a8/CgkOOI72XehLzNxE9CKKYYa/xyxFa7 7bD8GY8T9AwMPw2f53y8 =MuMe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --74Gjv9Xtq6aWjqCwB6g6s7gWvCOLpfa28-- From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 16:28:05 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C36BB14ABA; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 16:28:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nwhitehorn@freebsd.org) Received: from d.mail.sonic.net (d.mail.sonic.net [64.142.111.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1130516A4; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 16:28:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nwhitehorn@freebsd.org) Received: from zeppelin.tachypleus.net (75-101-50-44.static.sonic.net [75.101.50.44]) (authenticated bits=0) by d.mail.sonic.net (8.15.1/8.15.1) with ESMTPSA id u3JGS1Qu001797 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:28:02 -0700 Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: Alfred Perlstein , Lyndon Nerenberg , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> <201604190201.u3J216NQ054020@orthanc.ca> <5715968B.303@orthanc.ca> <5715A338.5060009@freebsd.org> From: Nathan Whitehorn Message-ID: <57165C91.7070005@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:28:01 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5715A338.5060009@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Sonic-CAuth: UmFuZG9tSVYH7Z0rIag6b4n8X91ajYG+faJ64ENo/i+2uyzHn8zRVZ3TH8eVsa+JdXnpPMHT7fXL2Ididv+DyY8SCCJNDX98gkwgNYmiErM= X-Sonic-ID: C;vjWRr0sG5hGNXLeqjlfmnQ== M;8uTQr0sG5hGNXLeqjlfmnQ== X-Spam-Flag: No X-Sonic-Spam-Details: 0.0/5.0 by cerberusd X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 16:28:05 -0000 Well, this discussion has gone pretty far off of the rails. I am of course happy to make a patch that cuts this down to 10 packages, but that's not something that should be committed without agreement -- which we obviously don't have. It would have been good to have had meaningful discussion of this before. There are basically three workable options: 1. Have fewer packages. This is easy to implement and preserves the integrity of the base system (as well as unified versioning so that a system at some particular patch level will have the same global state). I have not seen any meaningful downside suggested to this so far except for marginally higher load on update servers. 2. Have 755 packages. This makes it harder to version the system and makes the user interface significantly worse (my opinion, but shared by others). This is the easiest to implement since it is already implemented. 3. Have ~10 meta packages that just depend on sets of the 755 packages and hide the internal details. This gives the user experience of (1) with the implementation of (2), and is marginally more complex than either. Other things (the overlapping packages idea, for instance) are way too complex and will just lead to breakage. Can anyone provide an argument against (1) or, alternatively, for (2)? (2) seems to add a lot of complexity for no clear gain and I remain pretty confused about why it was chosen. -Nathan On 04/18/16 20:17, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > Maybe what the "too many packages" folks need to do is write some code > to hide that it's so many packages. > > :) > > I think the rule of two feet should be applied here. > > What we have is people that have worked quite hard to bring us > something that we can easily work with, and on the other hand some > folks that want something they consider even better. Personally I > can't see how having the system less granular is better, since having > it MORE granular is actually harder work. > > Can someone on the "too many packages" campaign here explain to me how > having too fine a granularity stops you from making macro packages > containing packages? > > Because honestly I can't see how having granularity hurts at all when > if someone wanted to make it less granular all they would have to do > is make some meta-packages. > > -Alfred > > On 4/18/16 7:23 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: >> On 2016-04-18 7:01 PM, Roger Marquis wrote: >>> Can you explain what would be accomplished by testing all or even a >>> fraction of the possible permutations of base package combinations? We >>> don't do that for ports. >> >> The ports tree isn't a mandatory part of the system. And by >> definition it could not be tested that way, since it offers so many >> alternative implementations of specific functionality. >> >>> Other operating systems don't do that for >>> their base packages. >> >> I'm pretty sure Solaris had some fairly hard-core regression tests to >> ensure basic system functionality wouldn't be compromised by >> 'oddball' selections of packages offered up at install time. >> >> > Honestly, some of us are wondering what exactly is >> > behind some of these concerns regarding base packages. >> >> The concern is from all of us UNIX dinosaurs who predate the >> fine-grained packaging environment, which just worked, and who now >> rip our (little remaining) hair out due to unsolvable package >> dependency loops in the Linux machines we are forced to administer in >> order to pay rent. For me, as a sysadmin, I derive a negative >> benefit from this optimization. >> >> I guess what I'm really asking is: where is the peer reviewed >> research that shows this actually improves things for the not-1% of >> FreeBSD users? >> >> --lyndon >> >> P.S. Don't turn this into a pissing match. I really want to know >> how this is of net benefit to everyone. But I don't want hyperbole. >> I have looked at a lot of, e.g., USENIX and ACM, bibliographies and >> papers for justification for this, and I can't find it. It would >> really help (me, at least) if someone could take a moment to point me >> at demonstrable evidence of the benefits of this model. >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list >> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >> "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 16:36:39 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D04DDB14F90; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 16:36:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alfred@freebsd.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B84561E0D; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 16:36:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alfred@freebsd.org) Received: from Alfreds-MacBook-Pro-2.local (c-76-21-10-192.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [76.21.10.192]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F1003346DF90; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:36:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: Nathan Whitehorn , Lyndon Nerenberg , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> <201604190201.u3J216NQ054020@orthanc.ca> <5715968B.303@orthanc.ca> <5715A338.5060009@freebsd.org> <57165C91.7070005@freebsd.org> From: Alfred Perlstein Organization: FreeBSD Message-ID: <57165E96.4040302@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:36:38 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <57165C91.7070005@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 16:36:39 -0000 I don't think we need 100% consensus to proceed on anything and if I've learned anything from 20 years in this community is that forcing that issue does the community a huge disservice as well as turn off the code submitters. See my thread on the missed opportunities in threads, or if you want I can paint the picture of what caused SMP to lag half a decade behind Linux as well. I would say that if someone submitted a patch for /dev/givemeroot, sure that would be righteously shot down but to force the whole, entire, "right" solution the first time around is remarkably blocking and unfair to the community and submitters as well. Why is this even happening in email? If folks want "the right solution" then why aren't they submitting patches or pull requests to the pkg repo (or where ever this is stored?). This seems counter-intuitive, but really actually should be how it works. Specifically: if you like where an idea is going, then don't block the code, submit improvements on top of it. Stone soup it if you will. -Alfred On 4/19/16 9:28 AM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > Well, this discussion has gone pretty far off of the rails. I am of > course happy to make a patch that cuts this down to 10 packages, but > that's not something that should be committed without agreement -- > which we obviously don't have. It would have been good to have had > meaningful discussion of this before. > > There are basically three workable options: > 1. Have fewer packages. This is easy to implement and preserves the > integrity of the base system (as well as unified versioning so that a > system at some particular patch level will have the same global > state). I have not seen any meaningful downside suggested to this so > far except for marginally higher load on update servers. > 2. Have 755 packages. This makes it harder to version the system and > makes the user interface significantly worse (my opinion, but shared > by others). This is the easiest to implement since it is already > implemented. > 3. Have ~10 meta packages that just depend on sets of the 755 packages > and hide the internal details. This gives the user experience of (1) > with the implementation of (2), and is marginally more complex than > either. > > Other things (the overlapping packages idea, for instance) are way too > complex and will just lead to breakage. Can anyone provide an argument > against (1) or, alternatively, for (2)? (2) seems to add a lot of > complexity for no clear gain and I remain pretty confused about why it > was chosen. > -Nathan > > On 04/18/16 20:17, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >> Maybe what the "too many packages" folks need to do is write some >> code to hide that it's so many packages. >> >> :) >> >> I think the rule of two feet should be applied here. >> >> What we have is people that have worked quite hard to bring us >> something that we can easily work with, and on the other hand some >> folks that want something they consider even better. Personally I >> can't see how having the system less granular is better, since having >> it MORE granular is actually harder work. >> >> Can someone on the "too many packages" campaign here explain to me >> how having too fine a granularity stops you from making macro >> packages containing packages? >> >> Because honestly I can't see how having granularity hurts at all when >> if someone wanted to make it less granular all they would have to do >> is make some meta-packages. >> >> -Alfred >> >> On 4/18/16 7:23 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: >>> On 2016-04-18 7:01 PM, Roger Marquis wrote: >>>> Can you explain what would be accomplished by testing all or even a >>>> fraction of the possible permutations of base package >>>> combinations? We >>>> don't do that for ports. >>> >>> The ports tree isn't a mandatory part of the system. And by >>> definition it could not be tested that way, since it offers so many >>> alternative implementations of specific functionality. >>> >>>> Other operating systems don't do that for >>>> their base packages. >>> >>> I'm pretty sure Solaris had some fairly hard-core regression tests >>> to ensure basic system functionality wouldn't be compromised by >>> 'oddball' selections of packages offered up at install time. >>> >>> > Honestly, some of us are wondering what exactly is >>> > behind some of these concerns regarding base packages. >>> >>> The concern is from all of us UNIX dinosaurs who predate the >>> fine-grained packaging environment, which just worked, and who now >>> rip our (little remaining) hair out due to unsolvable package >>> dependency loops in the Linux machines we are forced to administer >>> in order to pay rent. For me, as a sysadmin, I derive a negative >>> benefit from this optimization. >>> >>> I guess what I'm really asking is: where is the peer reviewed >>> research that shows this actually improves things for the not-1% of >>> FreeBSD users? >>> >>> --lyndon >>> >>> P.S. Don't turn this into a pissing match. I really want to know >>> how this is of net benefit to everyone. But I don't want >>> hyperbole. I have looked at a lot of, e.g., USENIX and ACM, >>> bibliographies and papers for justification for this, and I can't >>> find it. It would really help (me, at least) if someone could take >>> a moment to point me at demonstrable evidence of the benefits of >>> this model. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list >>> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current >>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >>> "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list >> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >> "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> > From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 17:18:38 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E097CB144F0; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 17:18:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org) Received: from onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru [IPv6:2a01:4f8:201:6350::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EEF01D2B; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 17:18:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [89.113.128.32]) (Authenticated sender: lev@serebryakov.spb.ru) by onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9D125973; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:18:35 +0300 (MSK) Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> <201604190201.u3J216NQ054020@orthanc.ca> <5715968B.303@orthanc.ca> <5715A338.5060009@freebsd.org> <57165C91.7070005@freebsd.org> <57165E96.4040302@freebsd.org> To: Alfred Perlstein , Nathan Whitehorn , Lyndon Nerenberg , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Lev Serebryakov Organization: FreeBSD Message-ID: <57166869.90805@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:18:33 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <57165E96.4040302@freebsd.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="l4LVBCmfFldA5WATWVlHSKsuIiVMlpsOc" X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 17:18:39 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --l4LVBCmfFldA5WATWVlHSKsuIiVMlpsOc Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="CinENeBHGIxQO3CnAIpP9T2a8brQOGGlM" From: Lev Serebryakov Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org To: Alfred Perlstein , Nathan Whitehorn , Lyndon Nerenberg , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Message-ID: <57166869.90805@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> <201604190201.u3J216NQ054020@orthanc.ca> <5715968B.303@orthanc.ca> <5715A338.5060009@freebsd.org> <57165C91.7070005@freebsd.org> <57165E96.4040302@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <57165E96.4040302@freebsd.org> --CinENeBHGIxQO3CnAIpP9T2a8brQOGGlM Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 19.04.2016 19:36, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > Why is this even happening in email? If folks want "the right solution= " > then why aren't they submitting patches or pull requests to the pkg rep= o > (or where ever this is stored?). This seems counter-intuitive, but > really actually should be how it works.=20 Ops should send patches with non-trivial code? Please, keep it in mind: here are thousands of SYSTEM ADMINISTRATORS / OPS (not fancy and trendy DevOps), who will use (and praise or suffer) new packaged system. Many of them understand, what is good and what is bad for them, but they CAN NOT and SHOULD NOT code in C and "submit patches". Now your, effectively, say "we are interested only in opinions of developers, not end-users". It is wtong-wrong-wrong. It is what Slawa try to tell: not developers will support thousands of servers which will have 755 packages only for base system, but admins and ops, and they have OTHER priorities over developers. And, of course, most of them could not send high-quality patches to such complex pieces of software as pkg or FreeBSD build system. --=20 // Lev Serebryakov --CinENeBHGIxQO3CnAIpP9T2a8brQOGGlM-- --l4LVBCmfFldA5WATWVlHSKsuIiVMlpsOc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJXFmhpXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRGOTZEMUNBMEI1RjQzMThCNjc0QjMzMEFF QUIwM0M1OEJGREM0NzhGAAoJEOqwPFi/3EeProMQAIqL/RH7qQdjgcVLn6uvvXZA 0vXuHOJ9EzaIkdu4fXR4hMBA0nrg2TPoWb9ANnjYmU5p6Bgjc8jPD6ks6bUBBxuK Je9OygMo1oQEJj4i5MZiEaiuSOzcNCl+VuLKgqWi5pf8xcQoyWCN4Mt/xyfN32h9 hDXtMtN6ucnzdOF9OGdTcgoDwpuOJ6cAuz6S5WrI4YiGQL3HVFVY7S7bAwsuz/05 gQ7Y8NMvBswlogRAySwH2M76twEbT5EVsckH+u7C25rZmZjEXROSo87D/j5ASsUK 3ZWyODy6wJMafvb0/3QhN5toaoqrkGQOeCc7RZM2WZHmoNR4O4jcd7SLIP4RQ1W0 qFEKohdAKqoI2Wqn5k6fW3ugPyba9Dt9sI5vo6ogPH+HfjkaQKfqnmnN+KMNYWTU IkoqR7HkxJH4nF4nhIGf28ZK7+ZuFWrl29fJaDK53QZBonj43uzuhvobYulsnVJA y6aIG/ZHXbVVRCrS36B8fM5icuSyF+ovQ5vCMiS95fyNTCUo22naIWXFwiDHP7yp 2KzQTpqm+lVudkji/ynoOTNkUIqVXRE6s7/HzYFropQEJ1pwTKrDFFEpcQjrUHOT A0LESk6isdoyWa4YlZNsW4zmQ9AKMTHhb4GoDYi/ks4oykRufTcF8YlAeY5eimkG Ka/wh61eq7cu59Ys7/9A =08yf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --l4LVBCmfFldA5WATWVlHSKsuIiVMlpsOc-- From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 17:18:41 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07CC7B14509; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 17:18:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org) Received: from onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru [148.251.9.81]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D60B1D3B; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 17:18:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [89.113.128.32]) (Authenticated sender: lev@serebryakov.spb.ru) by onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3E538974; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:18:39 +0300 (MSK) Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> <201604190201.u3J216NQ054020@orthanc.ca> <5715968B.303@orthanc.ca> <5715A338.5060009@freebsd.org> <57165C91.7070005@freebsd.org> To: Nathan Whitehorn , Alfred Perlstein , Lyndon Nerenberg , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Lev Serebryakov Organization: FreeBSD Message-ID: <57166870.5060104@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:18:40 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <57165C91.7070005@freebsd.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ew0eshAVrfxHUBgS5pbvm6NKDmIwikIOT" X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 17:18:41 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --ew0eshAVrfxHUBgS5pbvm6NKDmIwikIOT Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="GWcR6C3NuXf1hQsJ9NGDfAwsLRLrDhQpF" From: Lev Serebryakov Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org To: Nathan Whitehorn , Alfred Perlstein , Lyndon Nerenberg , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Message-ID: <57166870.5060104@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> <201604190201.u3J216NQ054020@orthanc.ca> <5715968B.303@orthanc.ca> <5715A338.5060009@freebsd.org> <57165C91.7070005@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <57165C91.7070005@freebsd.org> --GWcR6C3NuXf1hQsJ9NGDfAwsLRLrDhQpF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 19.04.2016 19:28, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > 3. Have ~10 meta packages that just depend on sets of the 755 packages > and hide the internal details. This gives the user experience of (1) > with the implementation of (2), and is marginally more complex than eit= her. How does it help Slawa with his broken system when "pkg upgrade" replace only half of "base" packages? Meta-packages as they are now: "no files, only dependencies" doesn't help here at all. Really, if I want "base but no sendmail" I want easy way to see it after 5 years after installation, and 755 packages, covered or not by meta-packages, will need me to read all list of 754 packages to see, that there is no sendmail, for example. It is trivial example, but it is completely valid. And there are many other such corner cases, which is common for administrators and ops, but not for developers. Please, consider ops and admins, who must support old installations, often made by other, not-reachable, people, and stuff like this, --=20 // Lev Serebryakov --GWcR6C3NuXf1hQsJ9NGDfAwsLRLrDhQpF-- --ew0eshAVrfxHUBgS5pbvm6NKDmIwikIOT Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJXFmhwXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRGOTZEMUNBMEI1RjQzMThCNjc0QjMzMEFF QUIwM0M1OEJGREM0NzhGAAoJEOqwPFi/3EePuYoQALRLdJkvrcoeMXTQyMpe/KAf kw31o9zrwP9JuGvgKVV7+iyURkR4r44ha/1oE0cjtCyun1ulRZChwhXHNoRAUES+ EBTHX4HohYcimq9O4jnHumbLQiKkXRwbuXH+/RAjS0dqV1ibZTE148cWtbg06nQe +iLrPl9RPBb4WoHeCc3u51POnSbZNBr+V5+HjTCcogLlQqFWdAACq4ppVRUtcRO3 BYMfrPEjILjDEMfJZ+5tXg/efP7JCHU4ym77T1xSTIiJxJhkhQ++doh01D4VjxqF ebFmjxbLMIdnrNVJUaLiPapcTVXiKYFMo1UM42pF2jn1P/327G1XaYSMGmI3RWyg xcJPBRR5e7692UimDxVhfny7HGyDeLQigOqBZxYZt5HoidSQmwdu4zmRgx66KCHN 4RS0v9qoMJm1gSxF4oeF8xKIXoD0ytq/13f+QIlL1GydiAikbx1aPfpCn/Ct/Yo2 DK07xXVTxyQZR+J7IUEcIwDnbYtdSPxH3nmYjUBTMeF6pRtsavDvJPINyD3ISyg4 q67CDPOWyCj4Lmft1URl8rBH6aXCYpPU8yyVgRL0bpQK5rHovGPCH22ck9wHV91u lcPyxAb0Hsw4De6eWf4P9iP4zo5yB+54U1p/ns/Zn/SGUZS8H9P3KSS/XlqAO2nr m2Fj6b6IMi/pJpX7Hnat =W3jw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ew0eshAVrfxHUBgS5pbvm6NKDmIwikIOT-- From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 17:55:37 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A549DB153B6; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 17:55:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marquis@roble.com) Received: from mx5.roble.com (mx5.roble.com [206.40.34.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx5.roble.com", Issuer "mx5.roble.com" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3DB1719B6; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 17:55:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marquis@roble.com) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:55:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Roger Marquis To: Lev Serebryakov cc: Nathan Whitehorn , Alfred Perlstein , Lyndon Nerenberg , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) In-Reply-To: <57166870.5060104@FreeBSD.org> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> <201604190201.u3J216NQ054020@orthanc.ca> <5715968B.303@orthanc.ca> <5715A338.5060009@freebsd.org> <57165C91.7070005@freebsd.org> <57166870.5060104@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 17:55:37 -0000 > Please, consider ops and admins, who must support old installations, > often made by other, not-reachable, people, and stuff like this, Ops and admins such as myself are exactly the ones who will benefit most from base packages. Being able run to: 1) 'pkg audit' and see that base ssl has a vulnerability, 2) 'pkg install -f' to update 3) only those specific parts of base that need to be updated is far simpler (KIS) and faster than what we go through now. More than a few formerly bsd shops have migrated to linux simply to avoid regular iterations of cd /usr/src; svn up; make cleanworld; make buildworld installworld ... The use cases for granular base packages are more numerous than even these obvious ones. The downside OTOH, seems to consist of not much more than the size of the package list. If I missed other issues please do clarify. Will base packages be improved, sure, but they're already more useful and bugfree than pkgng when it was mandated. In any case, if I'm not mistaken base packages are entirely optional. Roger Marquis From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 18:22:20 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7178B15D44; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 18:22:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nwhitehorn@freebsd.org) Received: from d.mail.sonic.net (d.mail.sonic.net [64.142.111.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8363F18E5; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 18:22:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nwhitehorn@freebsd.org) Received: from zeppelin.tachypleus.net (75-101-50-44.static.sonic.net [75.101.50.44]) (authenticated bits=0) by d.mail.sonic.net (8.15.1/8.15.1) with ESMTPSA id u3JIMI8I028398 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:22:18 -0700 Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: Roger Marquis , Lev Serebryakov References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> <201604190201.u3J216NQ054020@orthanc.ca> <5715968B.303@orthanc.ca> <5715A338.5060009@freebsd.org> <57165C91.7070005@freebsd.org> <57166870.5060104@FreeBSD.org> <201604191755.u3JHtbfS020358@l.mx.sonic.net> Cc: Alfred Perlstein , Lyndon Nerenberg , freebsd-pkgbase@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org From: Nathan Whitehorn Message-ID: <5716775A.2000401@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:22:18 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <201604191755.u3JHtbfS020358@l.mx.sonic.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Sonic-CAuth: UmFuZG9tSVYb77rFijGcMFXLAI+hHr6N7qHqYcFivMuSyN4WCgkVzgrujANTWZaFhJgSJKcDhWso/dXR6LcW1HjVSHR5KJeRfEtYL8OuYak= X-Sonic-ID: C;UAwxplsG5hGLLreqjlfmnQ== M;hlFvplsG5hGLLreqjlfmnQ== X-Spam-Flag: No X-Sonic-Spam-Details: 0.0/5.0 by cerberusd X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 18:22:20 -0000 On 04/19/16 10:55, Roger Marquis wrote: >> Please, consider ops and admins, who must support old installations, >> often made by other, not-reachable, people, and stuff like this, > > Ops and admins such as myself are exactly the ones who will benefit most > from base packages. Being able run to: 1) 'pkg audit' and see that base > ssl has a vulnerability, 2) 'pkg install -f' to update 3) only those > specific parts of base that need to be updated is far simpler (KIS) and > faster than what we go through now. More than a few formerly bsd shops > have migrated to linux simply to avoid regular iterations of cd > /usr/src; svn up; make cleanworld; make buildworld installworld ... > > The use cases for granular base packages are more numerous than even > these obvious ones. The downside OTOH, seems to consist of not much > more than the size of the package list. If I missed other issues please > do clarify. Will base packages be improved, sure, but they're already > more useful and bugfree than pkgng when it was mandated. > > In any case, if I'm not mistaken base packages are entirely optional. > > Roger Marquis > Thanks, Roger. That seems perfectly reasonable. I'm not sure that goal is really met by having 800 packages, though, or at least I see no particular gain relative to a handful (where things like OpenSSL or sendmail would be discrete things). (Almost) every single individual library in the base system is right now its own single-file package, which is what I am objecting to. The upside of that seems pretty dubious and the downside is that it is much easier to accidentally put the system into an inconsistent state. Is there a reason you want to have such very fine discretization? -Nathan From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 20:00:36 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB7A8B0A9BA for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:00:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE54E1BBF; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:00:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from FreeBSD.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 161C51BA9; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:00:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gjb@FreeBSD.org) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:00:29 +0000 From: Glen Barber To: Renato Botelho Cc: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Subject: Re: /etc/rc is missing Message-ID: <20160419200029.GJ1554@FreeBSD.org> References: <86DCCBA7-4B1B-4A9B-955E-43DEE12A2104@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="sd4Jg/WNauRNsmTA" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <86DCCBA7-4B1B-4A9B-955E-43DEE12A2104@FreeBSD.org> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT amd64 X-SCUD-Definition: Sudden Completely Unexpected Dataloss X-SULE-Definition: Sudden Unexpected Learning Event X-PEKBAC-Definition: Problem Exists, Keyboard Between Admin/Computer User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:00:36 -0000 --sd4Jg/WNauRNsmTA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 12:05:47PM -0300, Renato Botelho wrote: > I=E2=80=99m doing some tests and noted /etc/rc is not part of any package. Yes, I'm looking into this. Former change somehow broke this, but the fix then breaks etcupdate for those not using packages. Glen --sd4Jg/WNauRNsmTA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXFo5YAAoJEAMUWKVHj+KTMasP/RKQZpblizkEov/BB31oVwQ5 hdc6P3zWo3GokvmHrVqUQcIKuFJXaIEFgKLRN5NVPlMt+cIRnkzll9izvhrD9LAU h9pCUnSMDywBr0dgaSkWMf9C+bp3E8In9fKXvZ2s2z0GA+SxmXvrc47Wrj5ROhmK rLfo336ZLr1bD+1C64vmZZX28XvxJ35gMSgfSdy3tTOybwFx1Z+cwFq65QcIctAB VtmS7EaiR9D+edab3ZakQDCBBQPpwBIEiRYMLhOGuFj502D+PhM5rYgreBbrRPrj ByHCPQjhooE92EZPd0LkFGh9Ue14uuQtCxwuLDgOO8IXAQC4ZLq5V/X5VSsT3Mgt ELUPqxk+rMmq0HgtF9e4+uSyyREQwxoJtVcrDubC7BIa6pE47kmPDoM5WRx/ewQk 0oLQVEi/6wyWb50r399+k5GCzfLFxIJdeAvXGib+TWc275T7Xz3fNVUpUC0vSII1 jtV1Cpi3keu+XbiY5X4qGm1XR8DoraaiGqN6Jvd7w6haXjzFVwapI16V0G1yHx7O fHXu9GDx2mtVrDbXggMdsN4UFoTm/N8PjP9WWe0LC4ll2jH0cJn2K8yLfx7hoHOC nOYcqWj8/OFPQ8xAPbnCtsDkObGystkRkxmUMdtEt2ST2fSuL+P3mlK/pH+rb87x gkWMO6r7DelUQ42Ka2Bl =UB74 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --sd4Jg/WNauRNsmTA-- From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 20:17:49 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A025B144B6 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:17:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lifanov@mail.lifanov.com) Received: from mail.lifanov.com (mail.lifanov.com [206.125.175.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79C55129C for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:17:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lifanov@mail.lifanov.com) Received: by mail.lifanov.com (Postfix, from userid 58) id 7DB9A239440; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 16:17:43 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on mail.lifanov.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,SHORTCIRCUIT shortcircuit=ham autolearn=disabled version=3.4.1 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (vnat600.ejoco.com [166.108.32.32]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.lifanov.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0A5EE23943F for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 16:17:42 -0400 (EDT) To: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org From: Nikolai Lifanov Subject: early pkgbase feedback Message-ID: <2864275b-145c-6af0-9820-bd7866821ad7@mail.lifanov.com> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 16:17:41 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:17:49 -0000 I understand that this is contentious topic and I ultimately want this work to succeed, but there are a few gotchas that I'd like to report that I don't think were previously mentioned in another (now derailed) thread. o no separation of base and packages (boot environments, jails) Before, I was able to have a clear separation of base and packages and upgrade them separately. I accomplished this by having /var/db/pkg and /usr/local outside of boot environment ROOT. I was able to upgrade just the base system and if the ABI is stable packages "just worked". Now these are bundled. With jails, I used to be able to mount base in read-only with read-write /var/, /etc/, /usr/local/, etc. Now I'm not able to do this anymore. o no dependencies between base packages There is no recommendation for what I need to get a working system. For example, I'm able to remove things like libxo and have a massively broken system. Small example: # pkg remove FreeBSD-libvmmapi Checking integrity... done (0 conflicting) Deinstallation has been requested for the following 1 packages (of 0 packages in the universe): Installed packages to be REMOVED: FreeBSD-libvmmapi-11.0.s20160417160247 Proceed with deinstalling packages? [y/N]: y [1/1] Deinstalling FreeBSD-libvmmapi-11.0.s20160417160247... [1/1] Deleting files for FreeBSD-libvmmapi-11.0.s20160417160247: 100% # ldd `which bhyve` /usr/sbin/bhyve: libvmmapi.so.5 => not found (0) libmd.so.6 => /lib/libmd.so.6 (0x80085f000) libthr.so.3 => /lib/libthr.so.3 (0x800a72000) libc.so.7 => /lib/libc.so.7 (0x800c98000) o unclear mechanism for picking up new components Maybe meta packages will fix this, but when software like Unbound or LLDB is imported, "pkg upgrade" won't pick it up. If granularity property of base packages is used to remove something like Sendmail, then meta package for base would have to be removed as well, and new components won't be picked up during upgrades. I can always perform a "pkg install -r base -g '*'" or some such, but it's not obvious. Removal of old components is even trickier. I'm unclear how this is supposed to work. o no quick way to produce packages Packages are currently built serially. I use META_MODE to rebuild the source tree in ~30 seconds to pick up small changes and install by mounting src and obj read-only from the build box. It's all quick. It takes minutes to create packages, so I don't do this automatically. It might be intuitive that this time is paid off with a faster install, but in practice installing from packages is slower. o odd default versioning scheme On download.freebsd.org, snapshots are named like this: FreeBSD-11.0-CURRENT-amd64-20160206-r295345-... Base packages are named like this: FreeBSD-ssh-11.0.s20160418185743 Without overriding PKG_VERS in make environment, it's pretty tough to get a revision number from this. If there is a few hour delay from build to package, these need to be extracted to figure this out. Also, the abundance of precision in the name makes packaging runs from the same source non-reproducible because they depend on the time of the builder. They are also different to cache in a CI-like environment. o unclear upgrade mechanism If a package ${ABI} is FreeBSD:11:amd64, how will it be possible to upgrade to FreeBSD:12:amd64? Shouldn't "pkg" tool refuse this? o hard to detect breakage until it is too late Recently, a normal "pkg upgrade" run resulted in the removal of these: /etc/rc.sendmail /etc/auto_master /var/crash/minfree I didn't even notice this until a reboot of that system and things just stopped working. There was no etcupdate-like verbosity to removing these and they were not registered in my local pkg database. I can kind-of tell what's going to be on my system if I run install* and then delete-old* targets, but it's hard to be confident in the success of an upgrade due to lack of verbosity. o hard to revert from pkgbase to installworld workflow I use boot environments, and I had to discard quite a few during switching to pkgbase. To reasonably revert, the best I could come up with is roughly "create a boot environment", "pkg -r remove -f -g 'FreeBSD-*'", installworld, and use patch to apply an "etcupdate diff" from the host after a bootstrap created from the same revision. Please only interpret this as feedback. This work is important and will unblock Cool Things. Thanks for hard work, - Nikolai Lifanov From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 20:35:06 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3B4AB15113 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:35:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C2D0182A for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:35:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ascMV-000HWT-8B; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 23:35:07 +0300 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 23:35:07 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Nikolai Lifanov Cc: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Subject: Re: early pkgbase feedback Message-ID: <20160419203507.GI4841@zxy.spb.ru> References: <2864275b-145c-6af0-9820-bd7866821ad7@mail.lifanov.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2864275b-145c-6af0-9820-bd7866821ad7@mail.lifanov.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:35:07 -0000 On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 04:17:41PM -0400, Nikolai Lifanov wrote: > I understand that this is contentious topic and I ultimately want this > work to succeed, but there are a few gotchas that I'd like to report > that I don't think were previously mentioned in another (now derailed) > thread. > Please only interpret this as feedback. This work is important and will > unblock Cool Things. > > Thanks for hard work, Some bits from me. At time CFT I am create VM from ^/project, r296385. make buildworld builkernel packages && pkg add * (as in instruction). Now, after mergering to -head: remove /usr/src, checkout ^/head, r298214 make buildworld builkernel packages && pkg upgrade I am got partialy updated system, I am don't know what cause this problem. `pkg info` below: FreeBSD-acct-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Accounting Utilties (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-acpi-11.0.s20160418211012 ACPI Utilities FreeBSD-acpi-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 ACPI Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-amd-11.0.s20160418211012 AMD Utilities FreeBSD-amd-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 AMD Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-apm-11.0.s20160418211012 APM Utilities FreeBSD-apm-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 APM Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-at-11.0.s20160418211012 AT Utilities FreeBSD-at-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 AT Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-atm-11.0.s20160418211012 atm package FreeBSD-atm-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 atm package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-autofs-11.0.s20160418211012 Autofs Utilities FreeBSD-autofs-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Autofs Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-bhyve-11.0.s20160418211012 Bhyve Utilities FreeBSD-bhyve-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Bhyve Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-binutils-11.0.s20160418211012 Binutils FreeBSD-binutils-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Binutils (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-bsdinstall-11.0.s20160418211012 BSDInstall Utilities FreeBSD-bsdinstall-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 BSDInstall Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-bsnmp-11.0.s20160418211012 BSNMP Utilities FreeBSD-bsnmp-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 BSNMP Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-bsnmp-development-11.0.s20160418211012 BSNMP Utilities (Development Files) FreeBSD-bsnmp-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 BSNMP Utilities (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-bsnmp-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 BSNMP Utilities (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-bsnmp-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 BSNMP Utilities (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-bsnmp-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 BSNMP Utilities (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-bsnmp-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 BSNMP Utilities (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-casper-11.0.s20160418211012 casper package FreeBSD-casper-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 casper package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-casper-development-11.0.s20160418211012 casper package (Development Files) FreeBSD-casper-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 casper package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-casper-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 casper package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-casper-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 casper package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-casper-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 casper package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-casper-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 casper package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-ccdconfig-11.0.s20160418211012 ccdconfig package FreeBSD-ccdconfig-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 ccdconfig package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-clang-11.0.s20160418211012 Clang Utilities FreeBSD-clang-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Clang Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-clibs-11.0.s20160418211012 Core C Libraries FreeBSD-clibs-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Core C Libraries (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-clibs-development-11.0.s20160418211012 Core C Libraries (Development Files) FreeBSD-clibs-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 Core C Libraries (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-clibs-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 Core C Libraries (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-clibs-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 Core C Libraries (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-clibs-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 Core C Libraries (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-clibs-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 Core C Libraries (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 FreeBSD Base System (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-development-11.0.s20160304190332 FreeBSD Base System (Development Files) FreeBSD-dma-11.0.s20160418211012 DMA Mail Agent Utilities FreeBSD-dma-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 DMA Mail Agent Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-docs-11.0.s20160418211012 Documentation FreeBSD-ee-11.0.s20160418211012 Easy Editor Utilities FreeBSD-ee-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Easy Editor Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-gdb-11.0.s20160418211012 GDB Utilities FreeBSD-gdb-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 GDB Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-groff-11.0.s20160418211012 Groff Utilities FreeBSD-groff-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Groff Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-hast-11.0.s20160418211012 Highly Available Storage daemon FreeBSD-hast-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Highly Available Storage daemon (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-ipf-11.0.s20160418211012 ipf package FreeBSD-ipf-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 ipf package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-ipfw-11.0.s20160418211012 ipfw package FreeBSD-ipfw-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 ipfw package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-iscsi-11.0.s20160418211012 iscsi package FreeBSD-iscsi-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 iscsi package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-iscsi_legacy-11.0.s20160418211012 iscsi package FreeBSD-iscsi_legacy-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 iscsi package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-jail-11.0.s20160418211012 Jail Utilities FreeBSD-jail-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Jail Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-jail-development-11.0.s20160418211012 Jail Utilities (Development Files) FreeBSD-jail-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 Jail Utilities (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-jail-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 Jail Utilities (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-jail-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 Jail Utilities (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-jail-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 Jail Utilities (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-jail-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 Jail Utilities (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-kernel-generic-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 FreeBSD GENERIC kernel -debug FreeBSD-kernel-generic-release-11.0.s20160304190332 FreeBSD GENERIC kernel release FreeBSD-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 FreeBSD Base System (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 FreeBSD Base System (32-bit Libraries) (Development Files) FreeBSD-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 FreeBSD Base System (32-bit Libraries) (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-lib80211-11.0.s20160418211012 lib80211 package FreeBSD-lib80211-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 lib80211 package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-lib80211-development-11.0.s20160418211012 lib80211 package (Development Files) FreeBSD-lib80211-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 lib80211 package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-lib80211-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 lib80211 package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-lib80211-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 lib80211 package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-lib80211-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 lib80211 package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-lib80211-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 lib80211 package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libalias-11.0.s20160418211012 libalias package FreeBSD-libalias-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libalias package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libalias-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libalias package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libalias-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libalias package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libalias-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libalias package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libalias-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libalias package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libalias-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libalias package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libalias-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libalias package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libarchive-11.0.s20160418211012 libarchive package FreeBSD-libarchive-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libarchive package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libarchive-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libarchive package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libarchive-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libarchive package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libarchive-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libarchive package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libarchive-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libarchive package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libarchive-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libarchive package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libarchive-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libarchive package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libauditd-11.0.s20160418211012 libauditd package FreeBSD-libauditd-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libauditd package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libauditd-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libauditd package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libauditd-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libauditd package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libauditd-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libauditd package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libauditd-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libauditd package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libauditd-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libauditd package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libauditd-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libauditd package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libbegemot-11.0.s20160418211012 libbegemot package FreeBSD-libbegemot-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libbegemot package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libbegemot-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libbegemot package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libbegemot-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libbegemot package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libbegemot-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libbegemot package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libbegemot-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libbegemot package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libbegemot-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libbegemot package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libbegemot-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libbegemot package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libblocksruntime-11.0.s20160418211012 libblocksruntime package FreeBSD-libblocksruntime-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libblocksruntime package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libblocksruntime-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libblocksruntime package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libblocksruntime-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libblocksruntime package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libblocksruntime-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libblocksruntime package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libblocksruntime-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libblocksruntime package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libblocksruntime-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libblocksruntime package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libblocksruntime-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libblocksruntime package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libbluetooth-11.0.s20160418211012 libbluetooth package FreeBSD-libbluetooth-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libbluetooth package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libbluetooth-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libbluetooth package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libbluetooth-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libbluetooth package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libbluetooth-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libbluetooth package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libbluetooth-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libbluetooth package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libbluetooth-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libbluetooth package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libbluetooth-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libbluetooth package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libbsdstat-11.0.s20160418211012 libbsdstat package FreeBSD-libbsdstat-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libbsdstat package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libbsdstat-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libbsdstat package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libbsdstat-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libbsdstat package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libbsdstat-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libbsdstat package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libbsdstat-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libbsdstat package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libbsdstat-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libbsdstat package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libbsdstat-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libbsdstat package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libbsdxml-11.0.s20160418211012 libbsdxml package FreeBSD-libbsdxml-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libbsdxml package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libbsdxml-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libbsdxml package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libbsdxml-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libbsdxml package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libbsdxml-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libbsdxml package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libbsdxml-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libbsdxml package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libbsdxml-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libbsdxml package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libbsdxml-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libbsdxml package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libbsm-11.0.s20160418211012 libbsm package FreeBSD-libbsm-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libbsm package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libbsm-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libbsm package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libbsm-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libbsm package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libbsm-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libbsm package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libbsm-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libbsm package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libbsm-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libbsm package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libbz2-11.0.s20160418211012 libbz2 package FreeBSD-libbz2-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libbz2 package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libbz2-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libbz2 package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libbz2-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libbz2 package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libbz2-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libbz2 package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libbz2-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libbz2 package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libbz2-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libbz2 package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libbz2-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libbz2 package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libcalendar-11.0.s20160418211012 libcalendar package FreeBSD-libcalendar-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libcalendar package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libcalendar-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libcalendar package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libcalendar-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libcalendar package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libcalendar-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libcalendar package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libcalendar-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libcalendar package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libcalendar-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libcalendar package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libcalendar-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libcalendar package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libcam-11.0.s20160418211012 libcam package FreeBSD-libcam-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libcam package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libcam-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libcam package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libcam-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libcam package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libcam-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libcam package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libcam-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libcam package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libcam-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libcam package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libcam-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libcam package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libcasper-11.0.s20160418211012 libcasper package FreeBSD-libcasper-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libcasper package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libcasper-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libcasper package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libcasper-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libcasper package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libcasper-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libcasper package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libcasper-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libcasper package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libcasper-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libcasper package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libcasper-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libcasper package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libcom_err-11.0.s20160418211012 libcom package FreeBSD-libcom_err-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libcom package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libcom_err-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libcom package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libcom_err-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libcom package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libcom_err-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libcom package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libcom_err-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libcom package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libcom_err-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libcom package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libcom_err-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libcom package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libcompat-11.0.s20160418211012 libcompat package FreeBSD-libcompat-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libcompat package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libcompat-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libcompat package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libcompat-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libcompat package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libcompat-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libcompat package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libcompiler_rt-11.0.s20160418211012 libcompiler package FreeBSD-libcompiler_rt-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libcompiler package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libcompiler_rt-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libcompiler package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libcompiler_rt-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libcompiler package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libcompiler_rt-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libcompiler package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libcompiler_rt-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libcompiler package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libcrypt-11.0.s20160418211012 libcrypt package FreeBSD-libcrypt-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libcrypt package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libcrypt-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libcrypt package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libcrypt-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libcrypt package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libcrypt-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libcrypt package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libcrypt-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libcrypt package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libcrypt-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libcrypt package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libcrypt-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libcrypt package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libcuse-11.0.s20160418211012 libcuse package FreeBSD-libcuse-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libcuse package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libcuse-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libcuse package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libcuse-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libcuse package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libcuse-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libcuse package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libcuse-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libcuse package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libcuse-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libcuse package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libcuse-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libcuse package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libdevctl-11.0.s20160418211012 libdevctl package FreeBSD-libdevctl-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libdevctl package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libdevctl-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libdevctl package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libdevctl-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libdevctl package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libdevctl-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libdevctl package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libdevctl-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libdevctl package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libdevctl-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libdevctl package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libdevctl-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libdevctl package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libdevinfo-11.0.s20160418211012 libdevinfo package FreeBSD-libdevinfo-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libdevinfo package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libdevinfo-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libdevinfo package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libdevinfo-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libdevinfo package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libdevinfo-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libdevinfo package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libdevinfo-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libdevinfo package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libdevinfo-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libdevinfo package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libdevstat-11.0.s20160418211012 libdevstat package FreeBSD-libdevstat-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libdevstat package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libdevstat-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libdevstat package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libdevstat-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libdevstat package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libdevstat-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libdevstat package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libdevstat-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libdevstat package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libdevstat-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libdevstat package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libdevstat-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libdevstat package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libdpv-11.0.s20160418211012 libdpv package FreeBSD-libdpv-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libdpv package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libdpv-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libdpv package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libdpv-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libdpv package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libdpv-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libdpv package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libdpv-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libdpv package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libdpv-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libdpv package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libdpv-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libdpv package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libdwarf-11.0.s20160418211012 libdwarf package FreeBSD-libdwarf-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libdwarf package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libdwarf-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libdwarf package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libdwarf-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libdwarf package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libdwarf-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libdwarf package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libdwarf-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libdwarf package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libdwarf-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libdwarf package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libdwarf-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libdwarf package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libelf-11.0.s20160418211012 libelf package FreeBSD-libelf-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libelf package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libelf-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libelf package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libelf-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libelf package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libelf-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libelf package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libelf-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libelf package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libelf-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libelf package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libelf-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libelf package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libelftc-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libelftc package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libevent-11.0.s20160418211012 libevent package FreeBSD-libevent-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libevent package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libevent-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libevent package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libevent-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libevent package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libevent-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libevent package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libevent-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libevent package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libevent-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libevent package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libevent-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libevent package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libexecinfo-11.0.s20160418211012 libexecinfo package FreeBSD-libexecinfo-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libexecinfo package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libexecinfo-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libexecinfo package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libexecinfo-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libexecinfo package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libexecinfo-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libexecinfo package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libexecinfo-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libexecinfo package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libexecinfo-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libexecinfo package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libexecinfo-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libexecinfo package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libfetch-11.0.s20160418211012 libfetch package FreeBSD-libfetch-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libfetch package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libfetch-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libfetch package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libfetch-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libfetch package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libfetch-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libfetch package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libfetch-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libfetch package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libfetch-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libfetch package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libfetch-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libfetch package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libfigpar-11.0.s20160418211012 libfigpar package FreeBSD-libfigpar-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libfigpar package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libfigpar-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libfigpar package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libfigpar-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libfigpar package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libfigpar-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libfigpar package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libfigpar-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libfigpar package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libfigpar-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libfigpar package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libfigpar-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libfigpar package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libgeom-11.0.s20160418211012 libgeom package FreeBSD-libgeom-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libgeom package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libgeom-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libgeom package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libgeom-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libgeom package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libgeom-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libgeom package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libgeom-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libgeom package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libgeom-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libgeom package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libgeom-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libgeom package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libgpio-11.0.s20160418211012 libgpio package FreeBSD-libgpio-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libgpio package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libgpio-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libgpio package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libgpio-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libgpio package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libgpio-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libgpio package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libgpio-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libgpio package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libgpio-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libgpio package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libgssapi-11.0.s20160418211012 libgssapi package FreeBSD-libgssapi-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libgssapi package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libgssapi-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libgssapi package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libgssapi-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libgssapi package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libgssapi-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libgssapi package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libgssapi-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libgssapi package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libgssapi-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libgssapi package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libgssapi-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libgssapi package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libipsec-11.0.s20160418211012 libipsec package FreeBSD-libipsec-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libipsec package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libipsec-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libipsec package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libipsec-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libipsec package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libipsec-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libipsec package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libipsec-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libipsec package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libipsec-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libipsec package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libipsec-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libipsec package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libkiconv-11.0.s20160418211012 libkiconv package FreeBSD-libkiconv-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libkiconv package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libkiconv-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libkiconv package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libkiconv-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libkiconv package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libkiconv-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libkiconv package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libkiconv-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libkiconv package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libkiconv-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libkiconv package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libkiconv-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libkiconv package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libkvm-11.0.s20160418211012 libkvm package FreeBSD-libkvm-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libkvm package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libkvm-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libkvm package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libkvm-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libkvm package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libkvm-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libkvm package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libkvm-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libkvm package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libkvm-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libkvm package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libkvm-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libkvm package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libldns-11.0.s20160418211012 libldns package FreeBSD-libldns-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libldns package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libldns-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libldns package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libldns-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libldns package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libldns-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libldns package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libldns-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libldns package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libldns-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libldns package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libldns-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libldns package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-liblzma-11.0.s20160418211012 liblzma package FreeBSD-liblzma-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 liblzma package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-liblzma-development-11.0.s20160418211012 liblzma package (Development Files) FreeBSD-liblzma-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 liblzma package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-liblzma-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 liblzma package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-liblzma-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 liblzma package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-liblzma-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 liblzma package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-liblzma-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 liblzma package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libmagic-11.0.s20160418211012 libmagic package FreeBSD-libmagic-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libmagic package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libmagic-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libmagic package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libmagic-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libmagic package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libmagic-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libmagic package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libmagic-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libmagic package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libmagic-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libmagic package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libmagic-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libmagic package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libmd-11.0.s20160418211012 libmd package FreeBSD-libmd-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libmd package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libmd-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libmd package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libmd-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libmd package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libmd-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libmd package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libmd-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libmd package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libmd-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libmd package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libmd-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libmd package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libmemstat-11.0.s20160418211012 libmemstat package FreeBSD-libmemstat-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libmemstat package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libmemstat-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libmemstat package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libmemstat-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libmemstat package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libmemstat-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libmemstat package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libmemstat-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libmemstat package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libmemstat-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libmemstat package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libmemstat-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libmemstat package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libmp-11.0.s20160418211012 libmp package FreeBSD-libmp-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libmp package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libmp-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libmp package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libmp-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libmp package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libmp-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libmp package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libmp-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libmp package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libmp-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libmp package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libmt-11.0.s20160418211012 libmt package FreeBSD-libmt-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libmt package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libmt-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libmt package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libmt-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libmt package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libmt-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libmt package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libmt-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libmt package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libmt-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libmt package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libmt-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libmt package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libnetgraph-11.0.s20160418211012 libnetgraph package FreeBSD-libnetgraph-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libnetgraph package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libnetgraph-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libnetgraph package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libnetgraph-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libnetgraph package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libnetgraph-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libnetgraph package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libnetgraph-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libnetgraph package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libnetgraph-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libnetgraph package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libnetgraph-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libnetgraph package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libngatm-11.0.s20160418211012 libngatm package FreeBSD-libngatm-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libngatm package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libngatm-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libngatm package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libngatm-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libngatm package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libngatm-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libngatm package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libngatm-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libngatm package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libngatm-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libngatm package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libngatm-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libngatm package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libnv-11.0.s20160418211012 libnv package FreeBSD-libnv-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libnv package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libnv-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libnv package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libnv-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libnv package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libnv-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libnv package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libnv-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libnv package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libnv-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libnv package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libnv-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libnv package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libopie-11.0.s20160418211012 libopie package FreeBSD-libopie-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libopie package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libopie-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libopie package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libopie-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libopie package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libopie-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libopie package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libopie-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libopie package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libopie-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libopie package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libopie-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libopie package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libpam-11.0.s20160304190332 libpam package FreeBSD-libpam-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libpam package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libpam-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libpam package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libpam-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libpam package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libpam-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libpam package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libpam-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libpam package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libpcap-11.0.s20160418211012 libpcap package FreeBSD-libpcap-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libpcap package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libpcap-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libpcap package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libpcap-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libpcap package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libpcap-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libpcap package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libpcap-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libpcap package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libpcap-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libpcap package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libpcap-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libpcap package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libpjdlog-11.0.s20160418211012 libpjdlog package FreeBSD-libpjdlog-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libpjdlog package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libpjdlog-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libpjdlog package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libpjdlog-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libpjdlog package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libpjdlog-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libpjdlog package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libpjdlog-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libpjdlog package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libpjdlog-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libpjdlog package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libpjdlog-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libpjdlog package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libpmc-11.0.s20160418211012 libpmc package FreeBSD-libpmc-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libpmc package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libpmc-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libpmc package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libpmc-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libpmc package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libpmc-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libpmc package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libpmc-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libpmc package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libpmc-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libpmc package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libpmc-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libpmc package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libproc-11.0.s20160418211012 libproc package FreeBSD-libproc-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libproc package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libproc-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libproc package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libproc-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libproc package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libproc-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libproc package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libproc-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libproc package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libproc-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libproc package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libprocstat-11.0.s20160418211012 libprocstat package FreeBSD-libprocstat-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libprocstat package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libprocstat-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libprocstat package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libprocstat-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libprocstat package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libprocstat-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libprocstat package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libprocstat-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libprocstat package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libprocstat-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libprocstat package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libprocstat-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libprocstat package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libradius-11.0.s20160418211012 libradius package FreeBSD-libradius-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libradius package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libradius-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libradius package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libradius-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libradius package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libradius-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libradius package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libradius-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libradius package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libradius-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libradius package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libradius-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libradius package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-librpcsec_gss-11.0.s20160418211012 librpcsec package FreeBSD-librpcsec_gss-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 librpcsec package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-librpcsec_gss-development-11.0.s20160418211012 librpcsec package (Development Files) FreeBSD-librpcsec_gss-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 librpcsec package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-librpcsec_gss-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 librpcsec package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-librpcsec_gss-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 librpcsec package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-librpcsvc-11.0.s20160418211012 librpcsvc package FreeBSD-librpcsvc-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 librpcsvc package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-librpcsvc-development-11.0.s20160418211012 librpcsvc package (Development Files) FreeBSD-librpcsvc-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 librpcsvc package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-librpcsvc-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 librpcsvc package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-librpcsvc-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 librpcsvc package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-librpcsvc-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 librpcsvc package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-librpcsvc-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 librpcsvc package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-librt-11.0.s20160418211012 librt package FreeBSD-librt-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 librt package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-librt-development-11.0.s20160418211012 librt package (Development Files) FreeBSD-librt-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 librt package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-librt-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 librt package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-librt-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 librt package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-librt-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 librt package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-librt-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 librt package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-librtld_db-11.0.s20160418211012 librtld package FreeBSD-librtld_db-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 librtld package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-librtld_db-development-11.0.s20160418211012 librtld package (Development Files) FreeBSD-librtld_db-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 librtld package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-librtld_db-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 librtld package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-librtld_db-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 librtld package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-librtld_db-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 librtld package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-librtld_db-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 librtld package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libsbuf-11.0.s20160418211012 libsbuf package FreeBSD-libsbuf-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libsbuf package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libsbuf-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libsbuf package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libsbuf-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libsbuf package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libsbuf-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libsbuf package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libsbuf-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libsbuf package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libsbuf-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libsbuf package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libsbuf-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libsbuf package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libsdp-11.0.s20160418211012 libsdp package FreeBSD-libsdp-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libsdp package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libsdp-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libsdp package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libsdp-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libsdp package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libsdp-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libsdp package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libsdp-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libsdp package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libsdp-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libsdp package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libsdp-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libsdp package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libsmb-11.0.s20160418211012 libsmb package FreeBSD-libsmb-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libsmb package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libsmb-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libsmb package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libsmb-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libsmb package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libsmb-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libsmb package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libsmb-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libsmb package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libsmb-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libsmb package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libsmb-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libsmb package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libsqlite3-11.0.s20160418211012 libsqlite3 package FreeBSD-libsqlite3-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libsqlite3 package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libsqlite3-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libsqlite3 package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libsqlite3-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libsqlite3 package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libsqlite3-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libsqlite3 package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libsqlite3-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libsqlite3 package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libsqlite3-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libsqlite3 package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libstand-11.0.s20160418211012 libstand package FreeBSD-libstand-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libstand package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libstand-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libstand package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libstdbuf-11.0.s20160418211012 libstdbuf package FreeBSD-libstdbuf-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libstdbuf package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libstdbuf-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libstdbuf package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libstdbuf-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libstdbuf package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libstdbuf-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libstdbuf package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libstdbuf-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libstdbuf package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libstdbuf-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libstdbuf package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libstdbuf-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libstdbuf package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libstdthreads-11.0.s20160418211012 libstdthreads package FreeBSD-libstdthreads-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libstdthreads package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libstdthreads-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libstdthreads package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libstdthreads-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libstdthreads package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libstdthreads-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libstdthreads package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libstdthreads-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libstdthreads package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libstdthreads-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libstdthreads package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libstdthreads-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libstdthreads package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libsysdecode-11.0.s20160418211012 libsysdecode package FreeBSD-libsysdecode-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libsysdecode package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libsysdecode-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libsysdecode package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libsysdecode-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libsysdecode package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libsysdecode-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libsysdecode package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libsysdecode-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libsysdecode package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libsysdecode-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libsysdecode package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libsysdecode-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libsysdecode package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libtacplus-11.0.s20160418211012 libtacplus package FreeBSD-libtacplus-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libtacplus package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libtacplus-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libtacplus package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libtacplus-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libtacplus package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libtacplus-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libtacplus package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libtacplus-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libtacplus package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libtacplus-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libtacplus package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libtacplus-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libtacplus package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libthread_db-11.0.s20160418211012 libthread package FreeBSD-libthread_db-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libthread package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libthread_db-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libthread package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libthread_db-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libthread package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libthread_db-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libthread package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libthread_db-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libthread package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libthread_db-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libthread package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libthread_db-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libthread package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libucl-11.0.s20160418211012 libucl package FreeBSD-libucl-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libucl package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libucl-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libucl package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libucl-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libucl package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libucl-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libucl package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libucl-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libucl package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libucl-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libucl package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libucl-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libucl package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libufs-11.0.s20160418211012 libufs package FreeBSD-libufs-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libufs package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libufs-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libufs package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libufs-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libufs package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libufs-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libufs package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libufs-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libufs package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libufs-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libufs package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libufs-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libufs package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libugidfw-11.0.s20160418211012 libugidfw package FreeBSD-libugidfw-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libugidfw package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libugidfw-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libugidfw package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libugidfw-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libugidfw package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libugidfw-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libugidfw package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libugidfw-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libugidfw package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libugidfw-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libugidfw package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libugidfw-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libugidfw package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libulog-11.0.s20160418211012 libulog package FreeBSD-libulog-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libulog package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libulog-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libulog package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libulog-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libulog package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libulog-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libulog package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libulog-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libulog package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libulog-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libulog package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libulog-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libulog package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libusb-11.0.s20160418211012 libusb package FreeBSD-libusb-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libusb package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libusb-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libusb package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libusb-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libusb package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libusb-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libusb package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libusb-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libusb package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libusb-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libusb package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libusbhid-11.0.s20160418211012 libusbhid package FreeBSD-libusbhid-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libusbhid package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libusbhid-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libusbhid package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libusbhid-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libusbhid package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libusbhid-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libusbhid package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libusbhid-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libusbhid package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libusbhid-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libusbhid package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libusbhid-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libusbhid package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libutil-11.0.s20160418211012 libutil package FreeBSD-libutil-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libutil package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libutil-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libutil package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libutil-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libutil package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libutil-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libutil package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libutil-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libutil package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libutil-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libutil package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libutil-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libutil package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libvgl-11.0.s20160418211012 libvgl package FreeBSD-libvgl-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libvgl package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libvgl-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libvgl package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libvgl-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libvgl package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libvgl-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libvgl package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libvgl-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libvgl package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libvgl-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libvgl package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libvgl-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libvgl package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libvmmapi-11.0.s20160418211012 libvmmapi package FreeBSD-libvmmapi-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libvmmapi package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libvmmapi-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libvmmapi package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libvmmapi-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libvmmapi package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libwrap-11.0.s20160418211012 libwrap package FreeBSD-libwrap-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libwrap package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libwrap-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libwrap package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libwrap-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libwrap package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libwrap-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libwrap package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libwrap-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libwrap package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libwrap-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libwrap package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libwrap-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libwrap package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libxo-11.0.s20160418211012 libxo package FreeBSD-libxo-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libxo package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libxo-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libxo package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libxo-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libxo package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libxo-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libxo package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libxo-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libxo package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libxo-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libxo package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libxo-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libxo package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-liby-development-11.0.s20160418211012 liby package (Development Files) FreeBSD-liby-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 liby package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-liby-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 liby package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-liby-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 liby package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libypclnt-11.0.s20160418211012 libypclnt package FreeBSD-libypclnt-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libypclnt package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libypclnt-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libypclnt package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libypclnt-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libypclnt package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libypclnt-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libypclnt package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libypclnt-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libypclnt package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libypclnt-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libypclnt package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libypclnt-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libypclnt package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libz-11.0.s20160418211012 libz package FreeBSD-libz-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libz package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libz-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libz package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libz-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libz package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libz-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libz package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libz-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libz package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libz-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libz package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libz-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libz package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-natd-11.0.s20160418211012 natd package FreeBSD-natd-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 natd package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-pf-11.0.s20160418211012 pf package FreeBSD-pf-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 pf package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 FreeBSD Base System (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-quotacheck-11.0.s20160418211012 quotacheck package FreeBSD-quotacheck-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 quotacheck package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-rcmds-11.0.s20160418211012 Remote Command Utilities FreeBSD-rcmds-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Remote Command Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-rescue-11.0.s20160418211012 Rescue Utilities FreeBSD-libwrap-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libwrap package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libwrap-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libwrap package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libwrap-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libwrap package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libwrap-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libwrap package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libwrap-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libwrap package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libxo-11.0.s20160418211012 libxo package FreeBSD-libxo-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libxo package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libxo-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libxo package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libxo-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libxo package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libxo-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libxo package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libxo-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libxo package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libxo-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libxo package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libxo-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libxo package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-liby-development-11.0.s20160418211012 liby package (Development Files) FreeBSD-liby-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 liby package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-liby-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 liby package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-liby-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 liby package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libypclnt-11.0.s20160418211012 libypclnt package FreeBSD-libypclnt-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libypclnt package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libypclnt-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libypclnt package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libypclnt-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libypclnt package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libypclnt-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libypclnt package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libypclnt-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libypclnt package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libypclnt-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libypclnt package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libypclnt-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libypclnt package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-libz-11.0.s20160418211012 libz package FreeBSD-libz-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 libz package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libz-development-11.0.s20160418211012 libz package (Development Files) FreeBSD-libz-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 libz package (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-libz-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 libz package (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-libz-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 libz package (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-libz-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 libz package (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-libz-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 libz package (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-natd-11.0.s20160418211012 natd package FreeBSD-natd-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 natd package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-pf-11.0.s20160418211012 pf package FreeBSD-pf-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 pf package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 FreeBSD Base System (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-quotacheck-11.0.s20160418211012 quotacheck package FreeBSD-quotacheck-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 quotacheck package (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-rcmds-11.0.s20160418211012 Remote Command Utilities FreeBSD-rcmds-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Remote Command Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-rescue-11.0.s20160418211012 Rescue Utilities FreeBSD-runtime-11.0.s20160418211012 FreeBSD Base System FreeBSD-runtime-manuals-11.0.s20160418211012 runtime-manuals package FreeBSD-sendmail-11.0.s20160418211012 Sendmail Utilities FreeBSD-sendmail-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Sendmail Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-sendmail-development-11.0.s20160418211012 Sendmail Utilities (Development Files) FreeBSD-sendmail-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 Sendmail Utilities (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-sendmail-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 Sendmail Utilities (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-sendmail-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 Sendmail Utilities (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-sendmail-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 Sendmail Utilities (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-sendmail-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 Sendmail Utilities (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-ssh-11.0.s20160418211012 Secure Shell Utilities FreeBSD-ssh-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Secure Shell Utilities (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-ssh-development-11.0.s20160418211012 Secure Shell Utilities (Development Files) FreeBSD-ssh-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 Secure Shell Utilities (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-ssh-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 Secure Shell Utilities (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-ssh-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 Secure Shell Utilities (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-ssh-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 Secure Shell Utilities (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-ssh-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 Secure Shell Utilities (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-svn-11.0.s20160418211012 Subversion Version Control System FreeBSD-svn-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Subversion Version Control System (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-syscons-11.0.s20160418211012 Syscons Console FreeBSD-tests-11.0.s20160418211012 Test Suite FreeBSD-tests-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Test Suite (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-tests-development-11.0.s20160418211012 Test Suite (Development Files) FreeBSD-tests-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 Test Suite (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-unbound-11.0.s20160418211012 Unbound DNS Resolver FreeBSD-unbound-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Unbound DNS Resolver (Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-unbound-development-11.0.s20160418211012 Unbound DNS Resolver (Development Files) FreeBSD-unbound-lib32-11.0.s20160304190332 Unbound DNS Resolver (32-bit Libraries) FreeBSD-unbound-lib32-debug-11.0.s20160304190332 Unbound DNS Resolver (32-bit Libraries, Debugging Symbols) FreeBSD-unbound-lib32-development-11.0.s20160304190332 Unbound DNS Resolver (32-bit Libraries, Development Files) FreeBSD-unbound-lib32-profile-11.0.s20160304190332 Unbound DNS Resolver (32-bit Libraries, Profiling) FreeBSD-unbound-profile-11.0.s20160418211012 Unbound DNS Resolver (Profiling Libraries) FreeBSD-vi-11.0.s20160418211012 Vi Editor FreeBSD-vi-debug-11.0.s20160418211012 Vi Editor (Debugging Symbols) pkg-1.7.2 Package manager From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 20:43:16 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22EF0B156D5; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:43:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marquis@roble.com) Received: from mx5.roble.com (mx5.roble.com [206.40.34.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx5.roble.com", Issuer "mx5.roble.com" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC5D51CBE; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:43:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marquis@roble.com) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 13:43:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Roger Marquis To: Nathan Whitehorn cc: Lev Serebryakov , Alfred Perlstein , Lyndon Nerenberg , freebsd-pkgbase@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) In-Reply-To: <5716775A.2000401@freebsd.org> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> <201604190201.u3J216NQ054020@orthanc.ca> <5715968B.303@orthanc.ca> <5715A338.5060009@freebsd.org> <57165C91.7070005@freebsd.org> <57166870.5060104@FreeBSD.org> <201604191755.u3JHtbfS020358@l.mx.sonic.net> <5716775A.2000401@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:43:16 -0000 Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > Thanks, Roger. That seems perfectly reasonable. I'm not sure that goal is > really met by having 800 packages, though, or at least I see no particular > gain relative to a handful (where things like OpenSSL or sendmail would be > discrete things). (Almost) every single individual library in the base system > is right now its own single-file package, which is what I am objecting to. Hey Nathan. I admit to not having looked at it with the goal of consolidation. Presumably there will be libs that can be grouped but we should look at each consolidation's pros and cons. Baptiste's rational is the policy we have and, IMO, refinement should start at that (policy) level. The process has no doubt accelerated thanks this thread but aside from debug, profile and a few others it's not clear if there are grouping policies that would significantly bridge the gap between our respective goals. It's critical that we look at other distribution's package systems. My count packages on Linux and monolithinc-base FreeBSD desktops is about 2,500 and 700 respectively. Adding 383 base packages (assuming no debug or profile) would push this 28% ratio to 43% of Linux' package count. Of course servers will be different and our FreeBSD package counts would rise from the low to mid 100s to over 600 which is still only 60-70% of the packages on Linux servers I have access to. Having managed Linux systems with 1000 to 3000 packages I can't say that I have real concerns for pkgng in this regard. The package management tools have to scale of course but on a KIS scale more packages = less time spent for a given level of functionality and security (in my experience). I hope we can look forward to some top-level policy suggestions to further refine the base package schema. Roger From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 23:24:23 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87AC8B158D1 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 23:24:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wollman@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu) Received: from khavrinen.csail.mit.edu (khavrinen.csail.mit.edu [IPv6:2001:470:8b2d:1e1c:21b:21ff:feb8:d7b0]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "khavrinen.csail.mit.edu", Issuer "Client CA" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4AB5E1668; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 23:24:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wollman@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu) Received: from khavrinen.csail.mit.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by khavrinen.csail.mit.edu (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id u3JNOLQZ080838 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL CN=khavrinen.csail.mit.edu issuer=Client+20CA); Tue, 19 Apr 2016 19:24:21 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from wollman@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu) Received: (from wollman@localhost) by khavrinen.csail.mit.edu (8.14.9/8.14.9/Submit) id u3JNOLQn080837; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 19:24:21 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from wollman) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <22294.48677.302730.437617@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 19:24:21 -0400 From: Garrett Wollman To: David Chisnall Cc: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) In-Reply-To: References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715E1E9.8060507@freebsd.org> X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0b under 24.5.1 (amd64-portbld-freebsd9.3) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (khavrinen.csail.mit.edu [127.0.0.1]); Tue, 19 Apr 2016 19:24:21 -0400 (EDT) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 23:24:23 -0000 < said: > I see basically three use cases for a packaged base: I'd like to add one more: 4) People who have their own custom builds and want to be able to do automated binary upgrades of the base OS in the same way that they upgrade other components, across fleets of servers. Right now it's not very practical to run your own FreeBSD-update server, and even if you have one, the process of applying these updates is still insufficiently automatable. We are not quite there yet with "packaged base", and in my particular use case, I'd be perfectly happy with one package for the entire OS. There are still a lot of things that need to happen with pkg in general to make automatic updates sufficiently reliable -- but being able to install minor updates with one command is already a huge improvement over where we are now. Huge enough, in fact, that I'm planning on entirely skipping 10.3 and waiting for 11.0 to come out *just to get this functionality*. Over the longer term, we need some additional capabilities to get to where we want to be. These would be things like: a) Proper dependency ordering for stopping and starting daemons during upgrades. b) Reliably determining which processes need to be restarted after a security update to a library (or a daemon that isn't started from an rc script). c) A general, configurable unattended-upgrade facility, so that we can just enable one periodic(8) job and be certain of getting security updates to the base system, reliably, with some indication of when a pending update requires a reboot that can be inspected by monitoring systems to raise an alert. -GAWollman From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Wed Apr 20 06:54:52 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2599B15FE9; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 06:54:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kraduk@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wm0-x22f.google.com (mail-wm0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D6B713DC; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 06:54:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kraduk@gmail.com) Received: by mail-wm0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id e201so38475678wme.0; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 23:54:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=xGK7L7YjQyi9Aw/ZsgfKIvwERtgrdzAYV/GqINYrvnk=; b=cu/1CigsH3QBxKNgHYUHLT60lGXnJ8ijF2igVKN98eKll+iyotL63cQcyoHGbQUh2/ jyDeK3JyaYRmfRl1BXpbh24p/y/VVS0PXQQn69dKsVMQ1sFnV9/3JLhNiMGsCPMRKdb1 E54ddqHWWsD2C52tu6vqcAtk4fslx6PkzDvPV8Js6YVQwvkTjeahGG9e6e7RQ0f4AsMW RgZVDSrTRae3MQ48Bv/wkDNf8pjmfMQtaeJlyWxFCCBjpKdfYHqcBuIEnwqLzAR3uoxV rhqxEFSe5B09IWHMYfmZrac7HWTRCfyDaVkgVzUAdFgHlVEQk7CSMxgb3d9eaYxkfYLC LhqA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=xGK7L7YjQyi9Aw/ZsgfKIvwERtgrdzAYV/GqINYrvnk=; b=OzwClGKrPUGZHqkQcioVA/qPh4UswSBEqx/RK/BOknMrtWxO7IqXmuuBax0YGdDkrz bwl99+BkYRYf5hjF/yDFJQylxAUmCPAttq5aeiZdiAs1lrWF4qNehnRVuxFYji26UC3t ZXlGPYHxc5x9xxRRm2bFprPRQXeEt6T4qcnj9Uo+oBYfiGvXIoDm1j6mKENmqWDk4wCl vnq8g9p1tLS0YSD0o156h/ngt8mR7CBAFBDb3QBljOpMmTWbI0EBRsX228WNCQMAkgVK puf1y4vr6vUtDMWMw1PYquhmOXCdj/BHHtV9/60wsFJ7mriz/g/srCs8axZCvHvNTVsa ekuw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FUMOnU0lp++Dg+oBGSs1JoiPC9uUy2e8ieGlvkMlqPwtMSK4KedKQGXgEHP/i1ReUULUoeEUAfGHQnUkg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.48.7 with SMTP id h7mr7673897wjn.81.1461135290888; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 23:54:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.28.46.67 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 23:54:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160418200354.GB4841@zxy.spb.ru> References: <5714E89A.8000807@gmail.com> <20160418141454.GX4841@zxy.spb.ru> <20160418141601.GA26116@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <20160418142709.GY4841@zxy.spb.ru> <20160418150325.GZ4841@zxy.spb.ru> <5715389C.9090502@gmail.com> <20160418200354.GB4841@zxy.spb.ru> Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 07:54:50 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: 11.0-RELEASE pkg base & base.txz file From: krad To: Slawa Olhovchenkov Cc: Ernie Luzar , questions@freebsd.org, Baptiste Daroussin , freebsd-current , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.21 X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 06:54:52 -0000 will it still be buildable though from source? On 18 April 2016 at 21:03, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 03:42:20PM -0400, Ernie Luzar wrote: > > > Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:27:09PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > > > > >> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 04:16:01PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > >> > > >>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:14:54PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > >>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:05:12AM -0400, Nikolai Lifanov wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> On 04/18/16 10:00, Ernie Luzar wrote: > > >>>>>> 11.0 will have pkg base, thats ok, but what does than mean for the > > >>>>>> base.txz file? > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> It it going to stay as part of FBSD install? > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I have many scripts for creating jails which depend on the > base.txz file. > > >>>>> It's even easier now: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> # mkdir -p /usr/jails/new > > >>>>> # pkg -r /usr/jails/new install -r base -g '*' > > >>>> And where /etc now? > > >>> What do you mean? > > >> At Jan 27 no package containing files from distributeworld. > > > > > > At Mar 02 > > > > > >> r298107 change this? > > >> > > > > You have NOT answered the original question, what's going to happen to > > the base.txz file in 11.0? > > Spliting to 800 packages, as I understund. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " > freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Wed Apr 20 07:38:55 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50A32B14DBA; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 07:38:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kmacybsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ig0-x241.google.com (mail-ig0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E5211789; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 07:38:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kmacybsd@gmail.com) Received: by mail-ig0-x241.google.com with SMTP id g8so5594933igr.0; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 00:38:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=OkkAImDXXo36gLktVGYw0UrIwe5beRNR1n0i+6s2MQc=; b=0T4zCgm3iAxzYoMlC4wkXR22hTLKxyJP/9vXYddLA8QzDBAXeWwenRdjw6OC8SiX5K +xwfaCkOO2vclHn2mlsdZc5Rw+TotcXNrw9QiVy8LqWSB4QtwYWuJ5LYftP5Eholb2bd JhP37qUT9eaQuNQff5u/6Gm4nRL64uBVNVtuMWlBGwSWFYF+1MKotaeo2YK/itKeXljP CVYi2fQty1KX75phS7dQHpf1cx9EkCbkgNusZeixAZ8kpCFvj8DUvJm12M4XNzwmhQ8u xl+t9I7DP+2riajjsj1n3zT1mT9dAGyHWkYJxngg4ehJC8XVRP+wa3xeUILzemz/WnZX yPSw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc; bh=OkkAImDXXo36gLktVGYw0UrIwe5beRNR1n0i+6s2MQc=; b=PZM9T4VfRwUHHYKEyJ3LTajLbOPBXAU0sHiV0bITS1ZLCHs6+M2AlXbD9fPvaQwh0L nUwtPqXZljyqvrVhhNI28M9Gung4ykbUGbkPMDSV7HOU1RsnAr5+FXYasmXk5TlxswyI PK2GUJvU3e8VzjC1vqmFPfyU+3eiYpH4FFSQYIWMEhIWakvbwoQJrjOc6mUZVEv/WnDF ZT6Xo0Jz585PZ4gYB+SgNZcDxeS23ZET8XOwZF1rV57j2zCKjpGbF1anMekNuaHHNxIk BHNd18g/3SmF2iyT+bIKX0WEcvwDQqN5DX0gSr6Eh2Rn/M7NOKlWu74/3Ro4vfYFuS5v M4+A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FVnDJENDiMOrltNX8CqNwNwvP49pkyHUwg3BWD4/4gl3njgub4OfGclTFd09069v3LbBdRtL4n+V6hVUA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.150.42 with SMTP id uf10mr1918519igb.95.1461137934396; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 00:38:54 -0700 (PDT) Sender: kmacybsd@gmail.com Received: by 10.107.6.166 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 00:38:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 00:38:54 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: LclYlj8TeTl5h8UkH72pdyDSqNc Message-ID: Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) From: "K. Macy" To: Glen Barber Cc: lev@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Current , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 07:38:55 -0000 On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Glen Barber wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:01:46PM -0700, Sean Fagan wrote: >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 11:52 AM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: >> > >> > I understand, that maybe it is too late, but ARE YOU KIDDING?! 755 >> > packages?! WHY?! What are reasons and goals to split base in such >> > enormous number of packages? >> >> Just a guess, having done the same thing myself: it means that updates can be >> more targeted. >> > > This is exactly the reason, which has been answered numerous times. I don't know what the "ideal" number of packages is. 755 does seem large. However, I see it being like KSE. In hindsight KSE was overly complicated and M:N threading wasn't the way to go. However, Julian's work brought native threading to FreeBSD. Something it sorely needed. Similarly, the packaging of base FreeBSD is something that has been desperately needed for a long time but the work to get there was simply overwhelming. Initially there will very likely be painful problems, but I'm comfortable that all those involved will course correct and converge on something that most people will be content with. I'm sure there are those with well articulated criteria for a different decomposition of base, with specifics on how and why. Those select individuals can contribute meaningfully to this discussion. Everyone else should just applaud their hard work and get back to work. There are plenty of bugs that could have been fixed in the time it would have taken to digest this whole thread. -M From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Wed Apr 20 09:42:13 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53014B147BF; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 09:42:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from garga.bsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qg0-x241.google.com (mail-qg0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C06B1E3D; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 09:42:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from garga.bsd@gmail.com) Received: by mail-qg0-x241.google.com with SMTP id 7so4255149qgj.0; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 02:42:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=EjqACbNQNUDocwC+rD6nqgCJDQUmKBEYafgg9qtZ3fc=; b=0Ud8ESMQmsl8XVIyaUc1DHTmIFjrmInLO/ElHX2UNTnME+qwmNVFWwWv/6y0DT2587 VlLzBj6cZ1+Yips6zAOjtLQtk7OT5nv2QmxIQf5Tsz9KX8xWxOWFXrPhw2HvYT1Qm79m uF6wgzRTUqhbg4bHf+EFRP6XQA5x3fUy8p61uS+Eg9sDyYqLWFZlmKUdtBrADXVZRmuu FPSyXi1zxmSN00dVxdtiRda7cXihgqr3+gtJR2w/E5/x1iOtf9LnO2/L/V/dZQkSFSXw ucna8FPLRNMkEt3WjRxjoaJ8jqJWvsEw79VHcuKkYyWoFdvPbEHgUvHcF6fvvxqe6tbu hnkg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to :date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=EjqACbNQNUDocwC+rD6nqgCJDQUmKBEYafgg9qtZ3fc=; b=SveQjxgrqQBjKfcxd8u0UyAfdkSNY7ox7O8fY1SNn0Q38O4nUk7SjKeKRu1ZUQbKFH 5MnsJS7/G500fv7nP4UUQjkHlvIhyuGgQI6xFIrdS3t/kTSTiMtEIgK/K99KBbde5TDA YMR7piUOwWR8dPRwKj1Jup09DUL5UQCfr+Aq2LH9UewSjsrcbfg/WHhUdWcgEc2pyyOV 8s1GYCOHjo69R5fV7rxPyCYmPd8IzDxmDWNkWnFTmAU0hnEjsxNIRxhpR/JFzAzZ4O91 a1lPNrLI1evJ5vwHIWThtS2N4cP8i8ii3PvgwILtwDIaRM2nCY8qrTfF4QUqrnB8tsZW rTYg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FWaJStVOmAvmoqxW/3C8qoW1A3UeC4WNG72WZvCsks2r4amAQvc0CizFSnFfe/REg== X-Received: by 10.140.181.137 with SMTP id c131mr9967944qha.94.1461145332272; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 02:42:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mbp.home (179-125-130-37.desktop.com.br. [179.125.130.37]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f83sm30978104qkb.25.2016.04.20.02.42.09 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 20 Apr 2016 02:42:11 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Renato Botelho Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Subject: Re: 11.0-RELEASE pkg base & base.txz file From: Renato Botelho In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 06:42:06 -0300 Cc: Slawa Olhovchenkov , questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, Ernie Luzar , freebsd-current Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <0E16B4D4-DB5D-4ABD-9D00-6AF819452724@FreeBSD.org> References: <5714E89A.8000807@gmail.com> <20160418141454.GX4841@zxy.spb.ru> <20160418141601.GA26116@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <20160418142709.GY4841@zxy.spb.ru> <20160418150325.GZ4841@zxy.spb.ru> <5715389C.9090502@gmail.com> <20160418200354.GB4841@zxy.spb.ru> To: krad X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 09:42:13 -0000 > On Apr 20, 2016, at 03:54, krad wrote: > > will it still be buildable though from source? Yes -- Renato Botelho From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Fri Apr 22 12:41:09 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F28FEB19E84; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 12:41:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from daniel@digsys.bg) Received: from smtp-sofia.digsys.bg (smtp-sofia.digsys.bg [193.68.21.123]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "smtp-sofia.digsys.bg", Issuer "Digital Systems Operational CA" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 196F01527; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 12:41:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from daniel@digsys.bg) Received: from [193.68.6.100] ([193.68.6.100]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp-sofia.digsys.bg (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id u3MCFqsw067866 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 22 Apr 2016 15:15:53 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from daniel@digsys.bg) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) From: Daniel Kalchev In-Reply-To: <201604190210.u3J2AHef003299@xt.digsys.bg> Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 15:15:52 +0300 Cc: Lyndon Nerenberg , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <68F587ED-6755-4E40-88B0-E90EAA79B0A4@digsys.bg> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> <201604190210.u3J2AHef003299@xt.digsys.bg> To: Roger Marquis X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 12:41:10 -0000 > On 19.04.2016 =D0=B3., at 5:01, Roger Marquis = wrote: >=20 > Honestly, some of us are wondering what exactly is > behind some of these concerns regarding base packages. >=20 Not taking a side on this discussion, yet=E2=80=A6 but the first thing = that occurred to me is that such way of packaging is traditional for the = Linux =E2=80=9Cdistributions=E2=80=9D. I could imagine people worrying = at subconscious level that FreeBSD is going the Linux way=E2=80=A6 and = that if they wanted such a model, they would be using Linux instead. = Today, people have more choice in packaging =E2=80=94 but if FreeBSD = goes the Linux way, someone else will fill the void =E2=80=94 so no = worries in general. I can see the support nightmare that a packaged base would bring, but as = always =E2=80=94 this is not enough to judge it. The benefits might be = worth it in the long run. I was a long time user of BSD/OS and then switched to FreeBSD when that = OS was killed. In BSD/OS everything was monolithic. It was rock stable. = Very dependable and very easy to support. My first few years with = FreeBSD were spent to get used that the OS was not just one piece, but = you could end up with different installs.. A bit more support efforts. = Not that I am complaining :) As long as packaged base is not mandatory, it is fine by me. Daniel= From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Fri Apr 22 13:46:01 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DF68B17980; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 13:46:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan_partelly@rdsor.ro) Received: from mail.rdsor.ro (mail.rdsor.ro [193.231.238.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 222CB11AF; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 13:46:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan_partelly@rdsor.ro) Received: from email.rdsor.ro (ftp.rdsor.ro [193.231.238.4]) by mail.rdsor.ro (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DB271F159; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 16:45:59 +0300 (EEST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 16:46:10 +0300 From: dan_partelly To: Daniel Kalchev Cc: Roger Marquis , Lyndon Nerenberg , , Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) In-Reply-To: <68F587ED-6755-4E40-88B0-E90EAA79B0A4@digsys.bg> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> <201604190210.u3J2AHef003299@xt.digsys.bg> <68F587ED-6755-4E40-88B0-E90EAA79B0A4@digsys.bg> Message-ID: <2fd7eba2f22590befb95825e16de13b9@rdsor.ro> X-Sender: dan_partelly@rdsor.ro User-Agent: RoundCube Webmail/0.4-beta X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 13:46:01 -0000 > > Not taking a side on this discussion, yet… but the first thing that I do not believe there are sides to take, because I am absolutely positive everybody in this thread wants only whats better for FreeBSD, so there is only one side. It is an aspect which in the heat of emotions some people seem to forget. >> The benefits might be worth it in the long run. The benefits are great and they are immediately available upon release of a packaged base. I am all for it . Yet there issue, such as the UI which doesn't handle well big numbers of packages, mechanism issues and convention issues which where raised in another thread and went unanswered by devs so far. Personally my greatest fear is that what happen to VIMAGE wouldn't happen with this great feature. Namely, that it goes in effect with a "good enough" implementation (which may well be a great success for some uses) and then we have to work with the "good enough" implementation for half a decade before it is made bullet proof and orthogonal. Or that UI issues are never solved, claiming that they are "largely cosmetic" anyway. I wouldn't mind waiting 2 point releases for example to become that way, but look, for VIMAGE takes what ... 6 years ? (Nota bene: I do not contest that VIMAGE is great. ) Pople raised valid concerns, devs imvolved in the project seen them, yet those who spearhead the base pkg project did not found appropriate to make a statement to quell ppl fears regarding their commitment to see to all the issues in a pre-determined time frame. I.E a commitment to make it bullet proof by 11.1 as example. Some felt threatened and unappreciated, which is a problem. Both for them and for us, the user. Because the users of this OS are not only the companies who employ the developers, there are thousand of people scattered through the world, ppl who have a great stake invested in this operating system, by the simple fact that they use it everywhere. Another small issue, is in general the politics of the FreeBSD dev team regarding bug fixes. I personally would be glad to see more commitment from the dev team regarding bug fixes. It is kinda disappointing to see known bugs going on and on for years, "good enough" susbsytems having the same fate, and so on. I beleive the team per-ansamble should make a more solid commitment to fix outstanding issues, and try to outline a policy regarding bugs and implementations which lack orthogonality or are only partially completed (even if this partially means 95% ). > occurred to me is that such way of packaging is traditional for the Linux > “distributions”. I could imagine people worrying at subconscious level that > FreeBSD is going the Linux way… and that if they wanted such a model, they > would be using Linux instead. Today, people have more choice in packaging — > but if FreeBSD goes the Linux way, someone else will fill the void — so no > worries in general. > > I can see the support nightmare that a packaged base would bring, but as > always — this is not enough to judge it. The benefits might be worth it in > the long run. > > I was a long time user of BSD/OS and then switched to FreeBSD when that OS > was killed. In BSD/OS everything was monolithic. It was rock stable. Very > dependable and very easy to support. My first few years with FreeBSD were > spent to get used that the OS was not just one piece, but you could end up > with different installs.. A bit more support efforts. Not that I am > complaining :) > > As long as packaged base is not mandatory, it is fine by me. > > Daniel > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Fri Apr 22 14:24:55 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40C8BB18B5F for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 14:24:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bsd-lists@bsdforge.com) Received: from udns.ultimatedns.net (static-24-113-41-81.wavecable.com [24.113.41.81]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22E8618F3 for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 14:24:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bsd-lists@bsdforge.com) Received: from ultimatedns.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by udns.ultimatedns.net (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id u3MERON9095541 for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 07:27:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bsd-lists@bsdforge.com) To: In-Reply-To: <76093.1461096570@critter.freebsd.dk> References: , <76093.1461096570@critter.freebsd.dk> From: "Chris H" Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 07:27:31 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=fixed MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 14:24:55 -0000 On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:09:30 +0000 "Poul-Henning Kamp" wrote > As far as I know, nobody is taking the source code or the Makefiles > away, so if somebody doesn't like the system being distributed with > pkg, they can very well roll their own. > > It's nice to see the level of enthusiasm the FreeBSD project can > muster, I just wish it wasn't always enthusiasm for stopping progress. Ahem... *always*? ;-) While I *do* have some opinions on the upcoming pkg-base, as well as the pkg system, itself. I'm playing catch-up with my INBOX. So I will only respond to your remark; I don't ever recall having been asked whether a package system should be implemented, and if so, how it should look. *Prior* to it's having been implemented. Tho it may have come up in the IRC channels. It never reached the mailing lists. *This* is the reason that *this* and similar topics become so heated; People who are part of a "community", such as FreeBSD. Want to feel they are part of the "big picture", and immediately feel resentment, when they find they were left out of "big" decisions, like pkg(8). While the conversation may well have been heated. It would *not* have meet *quite* as much adamant, persistent resistance. Because it (pkg) would have been molded into something from the culmination of the "community'" input. This is only from 50 years in the service industry, and the thousands of mailing lists I've been on, talking here. --Chris > > -- > Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 > phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 > FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe > Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Fri Apr 22 16:06:46 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3783B1912F; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 16:06:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from luzar722@gmail.com) Received: from mail-io0-x242.google.com (mail-io0-x242.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::242]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99F0E1384; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 16:06:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from luzar722@gmail.com) Received: by mail-io0-x242.google.com with SMTP id x35so3871070ioi.0; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 09:06:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=7drCFtCT4jvRxZ+EXBdVKjKvbms0zcvwZJhY83NTQ24=; b=LpLaulff6caOiLpO4DwjVq4juvm+0JC8OOmXvrlfwe1Nr+7s66nVKRB1qvag58w5dd WuQcd8HoZYd4ze3lslwIMxnG3/2k4emH2U917Uo7rNtISJKMgJbIw0fqdv2IYRPVazfV p+PWIegq/64w3YObo/jzHJM385i94IgMwMuUI2/rzSIzbur5aYNqDoFhsT/rgsm/XG1L xsXzTH0+OtpSePnBR/qjSzRB1N82ZrGIngpTvJO3N4fFWoOBwoXN31eD6EmtBdObDw8N Kvi2XnT+/ety92pWzEKl0p7inD//fZ2XgcaUSd2Y4MN/fPgM8l+S04lYx5/8Gu16ojRU pmQQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=7drCFtCT4jvRxZ+EXBdVKjKvbms0zcvwZJhY83NTQ24=; b=UXu0swfvsowD9VTCV+TtpixUryseeOJH3KmyDaibMvAZMmNTF1jdYKrflS3q5Ow+U+ ZfNB94QjtItVQs/kLM0AJGQAS3k5hmYXnzZpTXMI8Ir5lFLC4DVa0V1qSWU1hzqPfgYh W7lFhoET0ICq6xKJtFyFLaZEJQaZAXqgUcq0esdPqPwCJKvf7HrTgtnMUTChXVFAf4JL h9oCOq6wp28FXANnTmt5b5IHRs4EikN2gMUOZRhRDFluAhJCxY5smLZ8+GKKjThlZiK1 NhEWH/woR5KidVc6yFuZqA3PKsbS6P5KjDPa0giiy9R1h8sCvmO3dU6sxYCcnRuVM2gC miRw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FVk/PtDWTMjZWheO1BFA27uG4azRsaNlO0r3H10rwvvwPYp468E1qjLEcyfNPuyyA== X-Received: by 10.107.131.12 with SMTP id f12mr24805569iod.126.1461341205950; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 09:06:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.10.3] (cpe-184-56-210-236.neo.res.rr.com. [184.56.210.236]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id q9sm1876488igr.7.2016.04.22.09.06.44 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 22 Apr 2016 09:06:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <571A4C20.3050409@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 12:06:56 -0400 From: Ernie Luzar User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Kalchev CC: Roger Marquis , Lyndon Nerenberg , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> <5715772A.3070306@freebsd.org> <571588BB.2070803@orthanc.ca> <201604190210.u3J2AHef003299@xt.digsys.bg> <68F587ED-6755-4E40-88B0-E90EAA79B0A4@digsys.bg> In-Reply-To: <68F587ED-6755-4E40-88B0-E90EAA79B0A4@digsys.bg> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 16:06:46 -0000 > As long as packaged base is not mandatory, it is fine by me. > +1 on that