From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 4 15:42:10 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D048B44 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 15:42:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from martin.kelly4000@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ob0-f182.google.com (mail-ob0-f182.google.com [209.85.214.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E0458FC14 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 15:42:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ob0-f182.google.com with SMTP id 16so5003448obc.13 for ; Tue, 04 Dec 2012 07:42:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=D3NOHqbihydLktzO7g7xVAdHThYYLe6khWfdJozOaUA=; b=cosT3I1awoLdnTvFUPex/QqHdhadEMXKyzfgFbRNHer9hAQdUIT9JJLX3s9AaSqBsW bSgodC1d/Xu8+zjIvjAgJeMxwfMrPGKkSOWG2oeryB8cATm2ZpAGVqQ0+/4HPSjJ6CpJ tlEYe5Od4aOvw8fkYDWqJVLCurIlt5WiFBMECGmjZezML3+c0fDH14zxz82cNLSRIMRU ATh+XCDDloN8r+4t0yRCw8Bf8fSChIDAF348/m9k3xC8S+cJfxNI65CHGTdMZTVXy5mT yKZ0h4zkc3J84aZlaqbCYpZfHHx32eCBNu95QRnnHK8QCUARECkDOtUNS2Y3hTzU1LuV JHXQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.88.3 with SMTP id bc3mr7451408obb.8.1354635729412; Tue, 04 Dec 2012 07:42:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.60.76.233 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 07:42:09 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <50BE1391.7050009@marino.st> References: <1352882728.28075.140661153435965.302F0E4C@webmail.messagingengine.com> <87a9tw5qju.fsf@inbox.ru> <87wqwyuyxb.fsf@inbox.ru> <50BDAE0C.90303@marino.st> <50BE1391.7050009@marino.st> Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 02:42:09 +1100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Fwd: Unified BSD? From: Martin To: John Marino Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: users@dragonflybsd.org, misc@openbsd.org, netbsd-users@netbsd.org, Aleksej Saushev , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 15:42:10 -0000 Don't get me wrong, i am not criticising pkgsrc or intentionally trying get people offside. So aside from the obvious differences and limitations (i.e. manpower, design of each BSD system) What is stopping per say DragonflyBSD or any other BSD from using packages from FreeBSD or vice versa through pkgsrc? Or is it simply that some choose not to provide back to pkgsrc? On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 2:15 AM, John Marino wrote: > On 12/4/2012 16:07, Martin wrote: > >> Sorry forget that last message. >> >> GNOME was a bad example, but you did in essence you clarify my point. >> That FreeBSD or whichever one you talk about may or may not be using a >> different pkgsrc branch. >> >> I didn't call any components standardized, i said even if you _*were*_ >> >> to standardize certain components for all BSDs (related to package >> management/ source) you still would have to get around the fact that >> each of them may use a different pkgsrc branch. >> >> Otherwise you wouldn't have the current differences in software >> compatibility where FreeBSD has what (28000 packages?) and NetBSD has >> (15000?) >> >> > The package count of the two systems is basically affected by lifespan > (ports existed first) and manpower, so don't read into this. > > Ports has about 24000 unique packages, pkgsrc has around 10,800 unique > packages (about 2000 are duplicated with multiple python, ruby, php > combinations). > > The user has the option to stay on the branch suggested at the time of the > release, or can migrate as he/she wants. In the case of DragonFly, it was > catching up with fixing broken packages for a long time, so migrating to > newest quarterly is generally recommended. > > I would say pkgsrc serves to standardize the systems that use it. I could > install pkgsrc on OpenIndiana as an example and use the same software on > that platform. > > John >