Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 07:29:37 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jeffrey Bouquet" <jbtakk@iherebuywisely.com> To: "José Pérez" <fbl@aoek.com> Cc: "Matthew Seaman" <matthew@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-current" <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, "owner-freebsd-current" <owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <E1afpyb-0006I9-7i@rmm6prod02.runbox.com> In-Reply-To: <3a1d11dde8186d73db1b8b32004bdd30@mail.yourbox.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 08:53:10 +0100, Jos=C3=A9 P=C3=A9rez <fbl@aoek.com> wro= te: > El 2016-03-03 11:27, Matthew Seaman escribi=C3=B3: > > On 03/02/16 23:54, Glen Barber wrote: > >> Also note (as repeated below), running 'pkg delete -a' will implicitly > >> remove base system packages after they are installed. > >=20 > > This has the potential for many feet to be shot, given that up to now, > > 'pkg delete -a' would always leave you with a viable system. >=20 > Agreed. >=20 > Suggested workaround (a las *grep): create two pkg binaries with=20 > different names: > - "pkg" does what it does now and works on non-base packages by default.= =20 > Need an extra > arg to work on base system > - "syspkg" (or something) works by default on base system >=20 > We'd need way less crutches. >=20 > Regards, >=20 > --- > Jos=C3=A9 P=C3=A9rez > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" Hmm...=20 To reiterate this point.......... (1) As a wish here is for more code within pkg-install so that I do not encount= er a situation such as late last night whereupon I had to spend an extra half hour or so figuri= ng out that hplip installed a large number of unwanted additional qt4 ports alongside the cups upgrade = with pkg, ... so that a parameter or usual output would show NEW PORTS TO BE INSTALLED along= side each one from WHICH port is the request to install the new dependency... as a backdrop for this that I just thought of (2)... .... what if pkg on the base system deletes SOONER THAN THE USUAL make-del= ete-old that PREVENTS/HALTS the successful completion of the pkg updating base? So= mething critical to pkg itself proceeding? As a typo or bug?...... Maybe anothe= r cluster of testing=20 machines and weeks of testing before each pkg-release-avail or pkg-stable-a= vail became=20 known to FreeBSD users in emails... and that would maybe preclude pkg OF BA= SE from being useful for CURRENT installs due to a lack of testing, and/or make cur= rent upgrades more risky. Unless of course pkg of base is NOT relevant to CURRENT builds. In= which case please pardon the additional text slipping into this two-part food for thou= ght... little time to keep current on FreeBSD details vs FreeBSD ordinary usage cases.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E1afpyb-0006I9-7i>