From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 14 16:52:40 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0ED259A; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 16:52:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Devin.Teske@fisglobal.com) Received: from mx1.fisglobal.com (mx1.fisglobal.com [199.200.24.190]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B52A2925; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 16:52:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.fisglobal.com ([10.132.206.31]) by ltcfislmsgpa04.fnfis.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r6EGqRvN005046 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sun, 14 Jul 2013 11:52:27 -0500 Received: from LTCFISWMSGMB21.FNFIS.com ([10.132.99.23]) by LTCFISWMSGHT03.FNFIS.com ([10.132.206.31]) with mapi id 14.02.0309.002; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 11:52:26 -0500 From: "Teske, Devin" To: Chris Rees Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] No more pkg_install on HEAD by default Thread-Topic: [HEADSUP] No more pkg_install on HEAD by default Thread-Index: AQHOgGCkEhI/XtjETUan8/QjEhM8pplkGukAgAB+HwCAAB8QgA== Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 16:52:26 +0000 Message-ID: <13CA24D6AB415D428143D44749F57D7201FC59E8@ltcfiswmsgmb21> References: <20130712231637.GS85556@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <13CA24D6AB415D428143D44749F57D7201FC2DBD@ltcfiswmsgmb21> <20130713080732.GV85556@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <13CA24D6AB415D428143D44749F57D7201FC3AA2@ltcfiswmsgmb21> <13CA24D6AB415D428143D44749F57D7201FC3C92@ltcfiswmsgmb21> <13CA24D6AB415D428143D44749F57D7201FC3FAA@ltcfiswmsgmb21> <201307140613.r6E6Dsov002016@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <201307140706.r6E76Kg0002959@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <13CA24D6AB415D428143D44749F57D7201FC51FE@ltcfiswmsgmb21> <7325EE70-8821-4350-9D8A-E5CAAC548FE9@bayofrum.net> In-Reply-To: <7325EE70-8821-4350-9D8A-E5CAAC548FE9@bayofrum.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.132.253.121] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <0239E054A3543B45B7FB637C12DF9712@fisglobal.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.10.8794, 1.0.431, 0.0.0000 definitions=2013-07-14_01:2013-07-12,2013-07-14,1970-01-01 signatures=0 Cc: Devin Teske , Garrett Wollman , "freebsd-current@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: Devin Teske List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 16:52:41 -0000 On Jul 14, 2013, at 8:01 AM, Chris Rees wrote: > On 14 Jul 2013, at 08:29, Teske, Devin wrote: >>=20 >> To give you an idea as to just how helpful this is... >>=20 >> Imagine the following hierarchy: >>=20 >> src/pkgbase/depend/mystuff/script1 >> src/pkgbase/depend/mystuff/textfile1 >> src/pkgbase/depend/mystuff/sourcefile.c >> src/pkgbase/depend/mystuff/Makefile >>=20 >> You are a developer. You want to ship a package that contains "script1",= "textfile1", and "binary1" (which is compiled by saying "make" to turn "so= urcefile.c" into "binary1") >>=20 >> You want to ship 8 types of packages: >>=20 >> FreeBSD-4.11 >> FreeBSD-8.1 (i386) >> FreeBSD-8.1 (amd64) >> RedHat EL 4 >> RedHat EL 6 (i386) >> RedHat EL 6 (x86_64) >> Debian Wheezy >> Debian Wheezy 64-bit >>=20 >> This is where my framework comes in-handy... >>=20 >> cd ~/src/pkgbase/freebsd/RELENG_4/category/mystuff >> make >> # it pulled the necessary bits from "src/pkgbase/depend/mystuff" and bui= lt the .tgz >>=20 >> cd ~/src/pkgbase/freebsd/RELENG_8/category/mystuff >> make >> # it pulled the necessary bits from the "depend" dir and built .tbz >>=20 >> cd ~/src/pkgbase/redhat/rhel4/category/sub-category/mystuff >> make >> # pulled in "depend" and made .rpm >>=20 >> cd ~/src/pkgbase/redhat/rhel6/category/sub-category/mystuff >> make >> # pulled in "depend" and made .rpm >>=20 >> etc. >>=20 >> Of course, *any* time the depend tree has binaries in it... you have to = first do a make in there on the platform you want to ship the binary for, a= nd then do "make depend" in the platform-specific tree to pull in the binar= ies. Once you've done that, you don't have to muck with the depend tree aga= in unless there are changes there. >>=20 >> So, I assume that your prejudice remarks are because you haven't either = seen (a) such a platform or (b) such a need for said platform. >>=20 >> Yeah, I could rewrite the freebsd-specific logic to use "pkg create", bu= t let me tell you... >>=20 >> When you have to touch a file that needs to get shipped out to multiple = platforms... >>=20 >> It's damned nice to be able to build the FreeBSD packages under RedHat *= BECAUSE* the redhat RPMs can't be built under anything else (building an RP= M on FreeBSD and attempting to install it on RedHat results in an error mes= sage similar to "this is an rpm for FreeBSD; go away"). >>=20 >> Whereas FreeBSD will never balk about a package built on another platfor= m. >>=20 >> It's a huge time-saving measure... not having to jump over to each/every= unique platform to package things up *IF/WHEN* you know that there are no = binaries in the package *or* you've already checked the pre-compiled binari= es into the arch-specific hierarchy. >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>> Or you >>> can maintain the old cruft for your business -- just don't expect >>> anyone else to use it, or even want to. >>>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> I have no intention of making old-world packages... but I also have no i= ntention of using "pkg create". >=20 > You still haven't really explained at all why you can't use libpkg. If i= t doesn't run on Debian (not tried), it's got to be easier to port it than = rewrite a hacked version, hasn't it??? At least then you'll also be contri= buting back. >=20 Simple, really. Let's take RPM for example. The RPM package format has been ported to other= platforms. But, I can't take archivers/rpm4 and build on RPM on FreeBSD and install it= on RedHat. This is because the RPM format records the platform that you "build" your R= PM on (not the binaries, just the RPM) *into* said RPM. This actually adds a requirement to the RPM production that the RPMs be pro= duced on the platform that they will be installed-to. Currently, no such restriction exists for the building of FreeBSD packages = (within our system). This would have been true if we had ported pkg_create = (and may continue to be true if we ported pkg and its ilk), but let's say f= or the sake of argument that the future of "pkg" looks bright and it gets p= orted to all sorts of systems (ported in a fashion similar to RPM) *and* we= find one day that the +MANIFEST starts containing a target-platform (resul= ting in refusal to install a *.txz package because it was rolled on a diffe= rent platform. In that case, we'd then prefer to by-pass the tools and use our own method = of creating the tar-ball to lift such a restriction. ASIDE: If I knew how to force rpmbuild into creating androgynous packages f= or other architectures, I'd be doing that to life the restriction there too= , but I haven't figured out that. Basically... within our "pkgbase" tree, we like the branch within the tree = to dictate how a package is built... not what platform you're on. The goal = being that we can run a single package-build host that builds all of our pa= ckages from a single platform. --=20 Devin _____________ The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidentia= l. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message an= d all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any ma= nner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware= that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and revie= w by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.