Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 13:12:52 -0500 From: Mike Meyer <mwm-dated-1020103973.b26615@mired.org> To: Antoine Beaupre <anarcat@anarcat.ath.cx> Cc: freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: packaging base Message-ID: <15558.62884.852620.270991@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <0DFF2010-57A8-11D6-AE88-0050E4A0BB3F@anarcat.ath.cx> References: <15558.55806.422744.851621@guru.mired.org> <0DFF2010-57A8-11D6-AE88-0050E4A0BB3F@anarcat.ath.cx>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In <0DFF2010-57A8-11D6-AE88-0050E4A0BB3F@anarcat.ath.cx>, Antoine Beaupre <anarcat@anarcat.ath.cx> typed: > >> And libh will meet resistance not only from being a brand new system, > >> but also at trying to package base, which will break havoc among > >> developpers. > > > > How many developers use sysinstall, vs. rebuilding from source? Those > > are the only ones who are liable to care. If it's done right, then the > > new sysinstall should have packages defined by the NO* variables in > > /etc/defaults/make.conf, and should set the appropriate flags in > > /etc/make.conf for each part you don't load. > Please no. Please let's get rid of those variables. Please lets just > seperate the different parts of the tree clearly and isolate their > dependencies and let the developper make install where he wants. Using > variables, we'll end up with hundreds of them. It will be a maintenance > nightmare. Now you're talking about breaking "make buildworld", and that will generate a lot of resistance. It's not clear what you're proposing replacing it with, except for some portupgrade-like utility. > installworld is somehow doomed to go in the new scheme, as everything > will be a package and the line between base and ports will be blurred. > Everything installed through this procedure will have to be registered > through the package system. Yes, everything needs to be registered. No, installworld doesn't have to go away. I can see an installworld target that "knows" what packages are part of the base system, and only installs the ones that are already installed. That's actually cleaner than using make.conf variables. Buildworld can use similar tactics. But that's all *very* vague. A solid proposal is in order. Since you've apparently done more thinking on this than me, do you have one in mind? This is potentially something I can work on. Libh isn't, as I what little I know of tcl is enough to keep me from wanting to learn more. However, something like tcl is required, because part of the new port/package system is a safe way to encode actions on packages. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. 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?15558.62884.852620.270991>