Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 23:15:37 -0400 From: Mike Meyer <mwm-keyword-freebsdhackers2.e313df@mired.org> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr> Subject: Re: New FreeBSD package system (a.k.a. Daemon Package System (dps)) Message-ID: <17987.57305.7130.873114@bhuda.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <20070511021249.GA78729@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <200705102105.27271.blackdragon@highveldmail.co.za> <f20c8u$htp$1@sea.gmane.org> <17987.52037.112351.872442@bhuda.mired.org> <20070511015156.GA77895@xor.obsecurity.org> <17987.52970.398402.580727@bhuda.mired.org> <20070511021249.GA78729@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In <20070511021249.GA78729@xor.obsecurity.org>, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> typed: > On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 10:03:22PM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote: > > In <20070511015156.GA77895@xor.obsecurity.org>, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> typed: > > > On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 09:47:49PM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote: > > > > In <f20c8u$htp$1@sea.gmane.org>, Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr> typed: > > > > > I cannot currently actively participate in implementing proposed things, > > > > > but I can give advice on sqlite, database and xml schemas if anyone > > > > > wants to... > > > > One of the things that would be nice for a replacement to do would be > > > > to correctly install i386 packages on amd64 platforms (and similar > > > > things). > > > This has nothing to do with a new packaging system and can be done > > > today if someone cares enough to work on it. > > > > Well, yeah - *anything* can be done if someone cares enough to work on > > it - it's all just SMOP. You could definitely put enough smarts into > > the package installer do this without actually changing the packaging > > system. But if we're gonna change the packaging system anyway, why not > > consider adding information that the package building software already > > has so that the package installer software doesn't have to try and > > figure it out? > > Sure, we could pile on some more features onto a 6 year old design > document that never got out of the design phase, or someone could just > go and make the relatively minor changes to support i386 packages on > amd64 now. I guess it's always more fun to build dream castles though > :) Last time I looked into this, it didn't look relatively minor to me. But hey, if there's a document listing what needs to be done somewhere and it's really relatively minor, I need this bad enough to deal with that. On the other hand, if no one has actually done the work to figure out what this would really take, is wishful thinking really enough to keep a very desirable feature (well, it's desirable enough that most Linux platforms seem to offer it) from even being considered? > > > Not gonna happen as a default, but you can change it on your systems > > > if you like. > > Not very reliably. > Best I can offer ;) Is this the new motto for FreeBSD? Good QA practices would have the ports built with that knob set to something something other than the default at regular intervals. Lately things have been better, but I've found broken things in the last twelve months. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?17987.57305.7130.873114>