Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:02:24 +0200 From: Erik Cederstrand <erik+lists@cederstrand.dk> To: Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ca> Cc: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, FreeBSD-Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <9144F2D3-F039-4F65-9760-AD5B7F47D3E3@cederstrand.dk> 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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Den 19. apr. 2016 kl. 03.24 skrev Lyndon Nerenberg = <lyndon@orthanc.ca>: >=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=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9144F2D3-F039-4F65-9760-AD5B7F47D3E3>