Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 18:31:39 +0900 From: Tomoaki AOKI <junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp> To: Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> Cc: Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com>, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Mailing List <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: RFC: Renaming "FreeBSD" repo in /etc/pkg/FreeBSD.conf to "FreeBSD-ports" Message-ID: <20250820183139.07a25bf930db54bcd06b094b@dec.sakura.ne.jp> In-Reply-To: <da2907f9-d3c5-4063-88dd-7219c55ed399@freebsd.org> References: <05CD2AAD-31EA-471B-8028-A3902D7A4192@yahoo.com> <5bece4af-0bec-457e-847f-7ca1cb031f86@freebsd.org> <E605DC69-27F4-4EF6-AFDE-D682A625131E@yahoo.com> <da2907f9-d3c5-4063-88dd-7219c55ed399@freebsd.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 17:51:22 -0700
Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 8/19/25 17:44, Mark Millard wrote:
> > On Aug 19, 2025, at 17:25, Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> wrote:
> >> Right, I don't see any reason for having separate files. If I thought people
> >> might want to delete one of them (e.g. rm /etc/pkg/FreeBSD-base.conf in order
> >> to disable pkgbase) then I would separate them; but the recommended way to
> >> disable a repository is with an {enabled: no} in /usr/local/etc/pkg/ so I
> >> don't see any need to separate these.
> >
> > Will a pkgbase repo be present and enabled by default?
> > present but disabled? Not present at all in
> > /etc/pkg/FreeBSD.conf ?
> >
> > (I'm not trying to specify spelling for such here. But your
> > note might be better with this intended spelling also
> > being explicit so how it all fits together is more
> > clear.)
> >
> > If /etc/pkg/FreeBSD.conf is intended not to be edited at all
> > by default, that might have implications for some default
> > content there or inside /usr/local/etc/pkg/repos/ someplace
> > if pkgbase is not enabled by default.
> >
> > (My understanding is that pkgbase is off by default.)
>
> pkgbase is off by default in 14 but will be on by default in 15. People will
> need it to update their systems for security updates, for example, since
> freebsd-update is going away (at least in its present form -- it might turn
> into a wrapper around pkg).
+1 for keeping freebsd-update as a wrapper both for legacy and pkgbase.
It would help users still need legacy (pre-pkgbase) version inside jail
and/or bhyve that are installed from outside of jail / bhyve.
Also, upgrading legacy version to pkgbase'ified version would be in
consideration.
Considering the use-cases with existing scripts in the wild, legacy
options would be better kept as-is and introducing new option to use
pkgbase. So would be bsdinstall. But once all non-pkgbase versions
become EoL, the considerations would no longer mandatory.
> Users who want to update the base system from another source (no pun intended)
> will need to configure their systems appropriately.
>
> --
> Colin Percival
> FreeBSD Release Engineering Lead & EC2 platform maintainer
> Founder, Tarsnap | www.tarsnap.com | Online backups for the truly paranoid
--
Tomoaki AOKI <junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp>
home |
help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20250820183139.07a25bf930db54bcd06b094b>