Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 21:48:10 -0500 From: Jon Noack <noackjr@alumni.rice.edu> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bento and the ports system Message-ID: <40BBEE6A.1010308@alumni.rice.edu> In-Reply-To: <20040601024039.GA26824@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <40BBB1D2.4020800@alumni.rice.edu> <20040601024039.GA26824@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 05/31/04 21:40, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Mon, May 31, 2004 at 05:29:38PM -0500, Jon Noack wrote: >> What I envision: Packages are already being built (for example, >> http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/i386-packages-5-latest/). >> The ports system would default to using the package if available, >> but there would be an option to always compile from source. If the >> package wasn't available (not yet built, NO_PACKAGE, etc.), the >> port would be compiled from source as before. All that is needed >> is to set the default PACKAGESITE to the above URL (or something >> slightly different depending on architecture/release), make >> packages the default, and ensure there is enough bandwidth to >> handle the load (mirrors?). I know security would be a major >> consideration, but handling the load is the only technical >> 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). Yeah, I thought about that but figured a package with a default configuration might still be useful. > 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. I do this for several machines already. It works OK, but as you say, it is limited. >> P.S. The opinion on the DragonFly kernel list was that it was a >> good idea in principle, but that the *BSD package system is very >> fragile. > > Yes, well, everyone has an opinion about packages. True enough, but your opinion counts more than most. Jon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?40BBEE6A.1010308>