From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 8 03:20:05 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BACB6AF for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 03:20:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rsimmons0@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ee0-f52.google.com (mail-ee0-f52.google.com [74.125.83.52]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09072E00 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 03:20:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ee0-f52.google.com with SMTP id d17so1950601eek.25 for ; Sun, 07 Apr 2013 20:19:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=r9Fxwyyz3v9VPngwdUrPz/TjrXbZ6Z7IxdeAlIzeNvg=; b=W33MR/c4MEdgNUbp7CZ9vdGXoXRQyBuxjM4ObLNcMGQeVY3A6qw91vVIZqjwnBoAtU wV39FrEmBAbJF6tddwnWj+3BDO1BmpQXSfVVcnb1c9eZhs+2MFWC5dcGfjZiE5o/69BI J2fnCo0D4ixPK16+3tKUjsi6WJuKiLGR+9KHb6L6w32QOiisTlTdFeDPnp74EXzunWeG xSCwc/GCvlucwvUZNEkliLPnV7u7tty2PBStJxuHrPCm7kqU2IQtzula2DuD0ukndIiA 7ywP5fGuY0CgoWsZMcxGepGHHm3qytz3LuGOs8Sl+p5B3mkZQoOY5lsYvHyf1YUh58NJ kM2w== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.15.43.132 with SMTP id x4mr44258430eev.31.1365391198262; Sun, 07 Apr 2013 20:19:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.138.73 with HTTP; Sun, 7 Apr 2013 20:19:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51622F44.3050604@FreeBSD.org> References: <51622F44.3050604@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2013 23:19:58 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Growing list of required(ish) ports From: Robert Simmons To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 03:20:05 -0000 On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Bryan Drewery wrote: > On 4/7/2013 8:47 PM, Robert Simmons wrote: >> Are there plans to get the following ports moved into HEAD? >> >> 1) ports-mgmt/pkg >> >> 2) ports-mgmt/dialog4ports >> >> 3) ports-mgmt/portaudit >> >> 4) ports-mgmt/portmaster >> >> It seems to me like these belong in the base system. > > On the contrary, the idea is that more and more should come *out of > base* and into ports. Base is very static and stuck in time. By moving > these things into ports, you are able to get updates much simpler. No > need for an errata or security advisory or release. Just updating with > portmaster/pkg upgrade. I understand where you're coming from, but perhaps there needs to be movement in both directions. I may be way off the mark here, but I'd love to spark a discussion about this. I think that in general things that are directly FreeBSD projects belong in base. Examples would be pkgng, and making dialog4ports a switch in dialog(1). Essentially, code that does not have an upstream should be in base. On the other hand, there are a number of things that I think should be pulled out of base. Some already have ports, and others would need ports created. Examples of things to pull out of base are OpenSSL, Heimdal, OpenSSH, PF, ntpd, ipfilter, bind, sendmail, and others. Code that is typically way behind the upstream project basically. > > portaudit is not needed with pkg, just use 'pkg audit'. I had missed that. Thanks! > >> >> Also, is there a reason why dialog4ports's functionality wasn't added >> to dialog(1) as a switch? > > > -- > Regards, > Bryan Drewery > bdrewery@freenode/EFNet >