Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 18:27:38 +0000 From: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org> To: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org, Julien Laffaye <jlaffaye@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [ECFT] pkgng 0.1-alpha1: a replacement for pkg_install Message-ID: <AANLkTi==hy7L3arOONozRmmMmHRniH6ch8iot7tFyf0R@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4D9218DF.8060305@freebsd.org> References: <20110325101111.GA36840__48943.3474642739$1301049771$gmane$org@azathoth.lan> <4D90C8EA.2000901@freebsd.org> <AANLkTinaz9Y6kgjQvdS1Pu%2Bkay50DUs6FubcbCxcc3W2@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTi=uPaaxUVUDL3CPWByOeOZ2TjziUbrY7pJLQyAa@mail.gmail.com> <4D9218DF.8060305@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2011/3/29 Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>: > on 28/03/2011 21:22 Julien Laffaye said the following: >> On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Garrett Cooper <gcooper@freebsd.org> wr= ote: >>>> III. Package naming that includes architecture, major OS version (for = API/ABI), >>>> maybe more. >>> >>> This could be provided in the manifest. Doing it in the filename sort >>> of turns into a mess, as I've discovered working at Cisco :). >>> >> >> Actually, it *is* in the +MANIFEST of pkgng packages archives :-) > > Well, by the package name I meant not only a package file name. > Let's imagine that we do support installing i386 packages on amd64 in par= allel to > amd64 packages. =A0And for some reason I want to have both 32-bit and 64-= bit > versions of, say, firefox; e.g. for benchmarking. =A0If the packages woul= d have the > same name, then that would be impossible. > > I think that having some thing in package name in addition to package met= adata > could have certain benefits. > > -- > Andriy Gapon > I understand but I think pkgng is already quite radical changement. More change is taking the risk that it would be rejected in the end, we still do not have any reply from portmgr, there is no insurance pkgng will in the end replace pkg_install. Currently pkgng requires only very few changes from the ports infrastruture, I don't know the cost of changing the name scheme. If I'm not clear enough, supporting both 32bits and 64bits packages at the same time on amd64 or arches that could support this kind of installation, is a large change we don't want to take the responsability of :) and implementing this in pkgng would significate we already choose how it should work. regards, Bapt
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTi==hy7L3arOONozRmmMmHRniH6ch8iot7tFyf0R>