From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 9 12:00:58 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1B2916A4F8 for ; Mon, 9 May 2005 12:00:57 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mh2.centtech.com (moat3.centtech.com [207.200.51.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14C6E43D5C for ; Mon, 9 May 2005 12:00:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Received: from [10.177.171.220] (neutrino.centtech.com [10.177.171.220]) by mh2.centtech.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j49C0ubS050318; Mon, 9 May 2005 07:00:56 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from anderson@centtech.com) Message-ID: <427F50F0.3080905@centtech.com> Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 07:00:48 -0500 From: Eric Anderson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.7) Gecko/20050504 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brian Candler References: <20050509114410.GA2184@uk.tiscali.com> In-Reply-To: <20050509114410.GA2184@uk.tiscali.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Packaging of base system X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 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: Mon, 09 May 2005 12:00:58 -0000 Brian Candler wrote: > I'm not sure if this is the right place to post, so please point me > elsewhere if there's a better one. > > Recent discussions here mentioned the installation/upgrading/packaging of > the FreeBSD base system. > > Question: is there any fundamental reason why this could not now be moved to > using the 'package' system rather than just chunked tarballs, in time for > FreeBSD 6? [..snip large amounts of stuff..] I think this is a good move, however, how would things like portupgrade determine the difference between a port and a base system pkg? I suppose one could throw the right ignore concoctions into the HOLD_PKGS array in pkgtools.conf. I suppose this would break 5.x->6.x binary upgrades, however I'm not sure that's safe anyhow. :) Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology A lost ounce of gold may be found, a lost moment of time never. ------------------------------------------------------------------------