Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2001 17:43:02 -0700 From: Eric Melville <eric@FreeBSD.org> To: The Anarcat <anarcat@anarcat.dyndns.org> Cc: Alexander Langer <alex@usw4.freebsd.org>, libh@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Scrapping the "distrib" distinction (Re: cvs commit: libh/release/scripts installdistrib.tcl) Message-ID: <20011020174302.A72658@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20011019120625.A503@shall.anarcat.dyndns.org>; from anarcat@anarcat.dyndns.org on Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 12:06:25PM -0400 References: <200110101952.f9AJqxl34931@usw4.freebsd.org> <20011019120625.A503@shall.anarcat.dyndns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Shouldn't "distribs" be the same as "packages"? > > I think we should move all the distribs in (finer-grained?) packages so > that we have more control over the upgrade procedures, etc. Currently, > when someone installs the "bin" distro, he doesn't have any idea of what > is being put on the system, basically. It's just a plain tar zfxv -. :( > > In other words, everything should be packages, and the distrib concept > should be scrapped and replaced by "packages" and "third-party > packages". This is being discussed on the binup mailing list as well. I think base packages plus third party packages is the route we want to take. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-libh" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011020174302.A72658>