Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 10:21:02 -0700 From: Eric Melville <eric@FreeBSD.org> To: Murray Stokely <murray@FreeBSD.org> Cc: binup@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: design issues Message-ID: <20011016102102.B4211@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20011014180507.D2654@windriver.com>; from murray@FreeBSD.org on Sun, Oct 14, 2001 at 06:05:07PM -0700 References: <20011014170515.B39749@FreeBSD.org> <20011014180507.D2654@windriver.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > This weekend I sat down to work on some code for the binary updater, but I > > didn't really get anything done because I thought that a few important > > decisions where yet to be made, and really affect what I'm going to be > > working on next. > > I don't think that the situation is any different than when this > project started. Yes, that's the problem. > It's been talked about plenty of times. Jordan wrote a several page > outline about what he wanted in a next generation package system > at least 18 months ago. I'm personally a big fan of incremental > change, and I would like to see the base system broken up using our > current package framework for 5.0. > > # pkg_add bin.tgz Well, the big gain would be specifically not having bin, but rather base, gcc, perl, and so on. I suppose you're talking about going to a bin package first as part of incremental change? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-binup" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011016102102.B4211>