From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Tue Apr 19 07:24:41 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D1D4B1304E for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:24:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from vps1.elischer.org (vps1.elischer.org [204.109.63.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "vps1.elischer.org", Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8358D1FB2 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 07:24:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from Julian-MBP3.local (ppp121-45-252-92.lns20.per4.internode.on.net [121.45.252.92]) (authenticated bits=0) by vps1.elischer.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u3J7OZFO016038 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 00:24:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> From: Julian Elischer Message-ID: <5715DD2E.903@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 15:24:30 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.21 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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, 19 Apr 2016 07:24:41 -0000 On 19/04/2016 3:14 AM, Glen Barber wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:01:46PM -0700, Sean Fagan wrote: >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 11:52 AM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: >>> I understand, that maybe it is too late, but ARE YOU KIDDING?! 755 >>> packages?! WHY?! What are reasons and goals to split base in such >>> enormous number of packages? >> Just a guess, having done the same thing myself: it means that updates can be >> more targeted. >> > This is exactly the reason, which has been answered numerous times. But I would have thought that to the logical mind, obviously the simle statement "755 packages" is the wrong answer.. more than 10 should be obviously wrong. The only POSSIBLE thing that would make this an OK thing would be to follow that statement with "But to the external user it's really 4 packages unless you elect to split one of them." It would require that all 755 do *NOT show up* in the (standard) list of installed packages. Maybe they could show up in some other special list if you asked for fine grained information. We've managed to keep this disease out of BSD since I started to do it in 1990. First we laughed/fumed at Sun's Solaris when they unbundled the compiler. then we fumed at xorg when hey took a useful package and made 190 odd packages out of it. Please don't force this on us! > Glen >