From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 4 17:16:26 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5C0C106564A for ; Tue, 4 May 2010 17:16:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanefbsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qy0-f201.google.com (mail-qy0-f201.google.com [209.85.221.201]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98F778FC18 for ; Tue, 4 May 2010 17:16:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qyk39 with SMTP id 39so5815154qyk.8 for ; Tue, 04 May 2010 10:16:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Qoj7uSy1VNEzgfpbTdY71dt5ApJWGVJ1BCBjE8i8wGE=; b=moKU1rAQNdk0RQ8t+YTg4/JsNYJgpq2I9xhttb0wroBLL2XUdhtHlc8ENQWwDrMdsW JXvxP1RwwugDTpO8TaOjw2tSUq9VDUp/TPko0QCtdV8wmiDT+XvrGLGEaQT52LSB7BZd D2PAfVQMl1+9DHPGtM/y4ATpy8orSM3HBPMus= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=cME0ifzzQKHMz+oz5OY/Yl+XJQdUsg/StBQ1Pv8hs+htFnMPjNp+9/UNMvVZp31V07 646yiab2HHlXiMCTtIBD2uhjcnoMrb5a+F40gn2ZI1I68Cp6TI+YjnZhmi+V6tHrC+1e b8eSkwn5+0f5ojLIGddTUkUutOBfbRZOyOlAA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.79.75 with SMTP id o11mr5502437qak.195.1272993371945; Tue, 04 May 2010 10:16:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.251.17 with HTTP; Tue, 4 May 2010 10:16:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4BDFDA35.9010608@interactive-net.de> References: <4BBFD502.1010507@elischer.org> <4BC03ABA.6090309@elischer.org> <4BC0CC6F.7010009@freebsd.org> <4BDEDECD.70508@pcbsd.org> <4BDFDA35.9010608@interactive-net.de> Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 10:16:11 -0700 Message-ID: From: Garrett Cooper To: Reinhard Haller Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports and PBIs X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 May 2010 17:16:26 -0000 On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 1:26 AM, Reinhard Haller wrote: > Am 03.05.2010 21:55, schrieb Garrett Cooper: >> Also, for services like cups, there could have per-application >> virtualized networking stacks > Hi Garret, > > one jail per application -- theoretically the best idea -- no conflict > due to the elimination of cross-dependencies. > Havig updated a server with 10 jails last week going thru 11 boring > mergemaster sessions I'm not convinced this a practicable way. > > Considering my problems with the update of all installed applications my > keypoints are: > 1) We have too much applications to manage ports, oftly you have to use > 2 different applications to do the job, so even forcing all applications > to compile/update doesn't eliminate the need to set up the update more > than once. > 2) Ports like db (40-50), python (2, 25, 26) need a proper handling by > the ports management. Over time I had installed 4 db versions; apr > doesn't compile with db >48. > 3) Configuration dependencies are not properly handled (Installing xorg > in a jail due to a unneeded configuration default is no fun). > > The goal of PBIs as Julian proposed is to simplify the automatic > generation of simple apps. > > To achieve this goal we get another ports management application and > hope it handles also the non trivial tasks of the non simple apps. > > If the PBIs come with all libraries and resources we get even more > problems with multiple db installations not less. > > Are configuration dependencies (exim with or without ldap) addressed > with the PBI format? > > I believe we need a more precise way to express the dependencies between > the ports. I'm not going to feign knowing what's going on completely in this regard; if we were pointed to the software spec(s) for PBIs and the tools, it would probably make analysis easier. Thanks, -Garrett