From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 12 12:33:06 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 610F516A400; Sat, 12 May 2007 12:33:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stom@free.fr) Received: from postfix1-g20.free.fr (postfix1-g20.free.fr [212.27.60.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED0C313C469; Sat, 12 May 2007 12:33:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stom@free.fr) Received: from smtp2-g19.free.fr (smtp2-g19.free.fr [212.27.42.28]) by postfix1-g20.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC29FF54F24; Sat, 12 May 2007 14:15:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from btn.mine.nu (tok69-1-82-67-36-224.fbx.proxad.net [82.67.36.224]) by smtp2-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C72496E51; Sat, 12 May 2007 14:14:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by btn.mine.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C769A47CC3; Sat, 12 May 2007 13:12:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from btn.mine.nu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (btn.mine.nu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GOLCyecGFi5S; Sat, 12 May 2007 13:12:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.30.10] (88-137-169-58.adslgp.cegetel.net [88.137.169.58]) by btn.mine.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2B7147CC0; Sat, 12 May 2007 13:12:29 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4645AFAF.7010704@free.fr> Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 14:14:39 +0200 From: Philippe Laquet User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Windows/20070221) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stanislav Sedov References: <200705102105.27271.blackdragon@highveldmail.co.za> <20070512155059.92011d54.stas@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20070512155059.92011d54.stas@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Ivan Voras Subject: Re: New FreeBSD package system (a.k.a. Daemon Package System (dps)) X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 12:33:06 -0000 Stanislav Sedov a écrit : > On Fri, 11 May 2007 02:10:05 +0200 > Ivan Voras mentioned: > > >> - I think it's time to give up on using BDB+directory tree full of text >> files for storing the installed packages database, and I propose all of >> this be replaced by a single SQLite database. SQLite is public domain >> (can be slurped into base system), embeddable, stores all data in a >> single file, lightweight, fast, and can be used to do fancy things such >> as reporting. >> > > What is the reason to use SQL-based database? You'll perform direct > queries to database? The packaging system is for ordinal users, not sql > geeks, so they should not have to use sql for managing packages. So a > simple set of hashes will suffer or needs. I agree with Julian that we > should have a backup of packaging database in plain text format, and > utility to rebuild it. This way we can always restore the database if > something goes wrong. Furhtermore, that should not make a great impact > on performance, since we don't have to rebuild it every day. > I agree with Stan ;) "fast and improved" package utilities uses mainly some indexed berkeley DB combined with flat files, aren't they? I, and may be many other FreeBSD users use light systems for efficiency and eaiser management, if we use some database system it will require Disk Space, ressources for the DB to run, dependencies and so on... And we also may be exposed to a "that DB is better" war ;) > >> - A quick test confirms that the current bsdtar will happily ignore any >> extra data at the end of a tgz/tbz archive, so package metadata can be >> embedded there, thus conserving existing infrastructure and being fast >> to parse. I suggest encoding this metadata in a sane and easy to parse >> XML structure. >> >> I cannot currently actively participate in implementing proposed things, >> but I can give advice on sqlite, database and xml schemas if anyone >> wants to... >> >> > > Why use XML for that? It's hard to parse and hard to read format, and I > personally see no benefits of using it. If you're suggesting XML a > simple bracket-structure format (like bind's config) will fit our needs > much better (easier to parse and read and same benefits as XML). Also > we might consider YAML, thought I like this idea much fewer. > XML could be an altertative to order packages, it can be parsed with some limited dependencies like PERL. The userland tools to manage packages could be based on that language? It is well known by many users, quite simple, required by many other packages so the whole system won't be much heavier. PERL XML Parser can't be a good choice? * PERL-DB for managing packages databases * PERL-XML for parsing categories, dependencies ... PERL also give , in most cases, good performance issues. This is solely ma humble opinion ;) > -- > Stanislav Sedov > ST4096-RIPE >