Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 29 Mar 2001 15:20:56 -0800
From:      Jordan Hubbard <jkh@osd.bsdi.com>
To:        brooks@one-eyed-alien.net
Cc:        chrisc@vmunix.com, kris@obsecurity.org, libh@FreeBSD.ORG, op-tech@openpackages.org
Subject:   Re: PackageNG and OpenPackages
Message-ID:  <20010329152056I.jkh@osd.bsdi.com>
In-Reply-To: <20010329144334.A9413@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu>
References:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.0103291712460.58715-100000@vnode.vmunix.com> <20010329142742L.jkh@osd.bsdi.com> <20010329144334.A9413@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Yes, I agree with all of this.  This is also why I feel that any work
which goes into establishing *taxonomy* will never be wasted.  Let's
say that someone put some serious effort (and I think that'd be
merited BTW) into establishing what a merged /usr/ports and /usr/src
might look like.  Just for purposes of argument, let's say
it also ended up looking like this:

METADATA.xml    archivers       devel           japanese
palm		astro           java            print
russian		audio           editors         korean
science		benchmarks      emulators       lang
security	biology         french          mail
shells		cad             ftp             math
system		chinese         games           mbone
sysutils	comms           german          misc
ukrainian	converters      graphics        net
vietnamese	databases       hebrew          news
www		deskutils       irc             packages        x11

Not that it would, of course, since this is rather too flat of a
hierarchy and I'm sure someone could do better with even 10 minutes
thought (I just yanked in an `ls -C /usr/ports/[a-z]* and added "system" :-)

Into each of these directories could go all the metadata which
describes the contents at that level of the tree.  Ultimately you get
to the leaf nodes and those contain the metadata necessary for
describing that package - where its source lives, how to build and
install it, its dependencies, whether the sources can go away again
after its built and installed, etc. etc.  All of this kind of
information is ultimately pretty package-agnostic and I can easily see
a tree from which I could say "make packages FORMAT=deb" or
"make packages FORMAT=bsd" with equal ease, not to mention building
the "operating system bits" themselves.  If one choses and represents
the metadata correctly, it's always a superset of the information
needed by any particular target package format.

- Jordan

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?20010329152056I.jkh>