Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2025 12:02:07 +0100 From: Bob Bishop <rb@gid.co.uk> To: "freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org" <freebsd-pkgbase@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "freebsd-current@freebsd.org" <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: PKGBASE Removes FreeBSD Base System Feature Message-ID: <CAF94758-2ECA-45C9-82B2-D2B11F02CB36@gid.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <aJVS0tsV5oehOBPH@int21h> References: <zxdjhwcktnktdqzisgzy@qkoz> <FD0B239A-7DE4-4588-840E-C31FBBECBBEF@submonkey.net> <pecwwvnjxkiaplcpxkph@fpas> <CAFYkXjmc8K-vOPB0rQpWERejwLTc4kkM3623EjFRzRLTTK5qsA@mail.gmail.com> <aJVS0tsV5oehOBPH@int21h>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Hi, > On 8 Aug 2025, at 02:28, void <void@f-m.fm> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 07, 2025 at 01:43:28AM +0200, Tomek CEDRO wrote: >> +1 =) >> >> Base and Userland should be clearly separated, as it was, as it is, no >> matter how it will be organized internally (i.e. modular base) :-) > > +1 here also. > > Why not avoid breaking POLA by having a differently-named > binary for pkgbase management? Different switches, too. > -- +1 more. Too many bullet holes in my feet already. -- Bob Bishop rb@gid.co.ukhelp
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF94758-2ECA-45C9-82B2-D2B11F02CB36>