From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 31 19:40:52 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2729C16A4CE for ; Mon, 31 May 2004 19:40:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mtaw4.prodigy.net (mtaw4.prodigy.net [64.164.98.52]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED30943D41 for ; Mon, 31 May 2004 19:40:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (5673b528cb64f1ab5ddfcaf4b5cd16c7@adsl-67-115-73-128.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [67.115.73.128]) by mtaw4.prodigy.net (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i512eeCa006421; Mon, 31 May 2004 19:40:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 72930520B5; Mon, 31 May 2004 19:40:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 19:40:39 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway To: Jon Noack Message-ID: <20040601024039.GA26824@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <40BBB1D2.4020800@alumni.rice.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="W/nzBZO5zC0uMSeA" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <40BBB1D2.4020800@alumni.rice.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bento and the ports system X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 02:40:52 -0000 --W/nzBZO5zC0uMSeA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, May 31, 2004 at 05:29:38PM -0500, Jon Noack wrote: > What I envision: > Packages are already being built (for example,=20 > http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/i386-packages-5-latest/). The=20 > ports system would default to using the package if available, but there= =20 > would be an option to always compile from source. If the package wasn't= =20 > available (not yet built, NO_PACKAGE, etc.), the port would be compiled= =20 > from source as before. All that is needed is to set the default=20 > PACKAGESITE to the above URL (or something slightly different depending= =20 > on architecture/release), make packages the default, and ensure there is= =20 > enough bandwidth to handle the load (mirrors?). I know security would=20 > be a major consideration, but handling the load is the only technical=20 > difficulty I see... Packages on pointyhat may not always be consistent or working. Furthermore, they may not interoperate as expected with what you have on your own system, because ports are customized for installed packages and build settings (e.g. building with GNOME support when you have GNOME installed). The packages on the FTP site are updated periodically from a known-good build. If you don't mind about the limitations, you can already use these automatically with pkg_add -r or portupgrade -P. > P.S. The opinion on the DragonFly kernel list was that it was a good=20 > idea in principle, but that the *BSD package system is very fragile. Yes, well, everyone has an opinion about packages. Kris --W/nzBZO5zC0uMSeA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAu+ynWry0BWjoQKURAvHaAKDyOXyHHivnSWpC8+KGFJlc7XQFaACfSvoH 5VdOu19qK2Le4ntSlzNsfU0= =PejO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --W/nzBZO5zC0uMSeA--