Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:21:28 -0700 From: Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org> To: Glen Barber <gjb@freebsd.org>, Sean Fagan <sef@ixsystems.com> Cc: lev@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 04/18/16 12:14, Glen Barber wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:01:46PM -0700, Sean Fagan wrote: >> On Apr 18, 2016, at 11:52 AM, Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >>> I understand, that maybe it is too late, but ARE YOU KIDDING?! 755 >>> packages?! WHY?! What are reasons and goals to split base in such >>> enormous number of packages? >> Just a guess, having done the same thing myself: it means that updates can be >> more targeted. >> > This is exactly the reason, which has been answered numerous times. > > Glen > That's a good reason -- and a very nice outcome of having base system packages -- but I worry that it may be going too far. The most granular updates would be if every file were its own package, which is obviously crazy, and so there is some middle ground. Needing to grab a whole new base.txz is probably too much (60 MB), but splitting that into even 6 or 7 pieces moves the updates to replacements with typical size (a few MB) that are no larger than typical package updates for ports. -Nathan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?571533B8.6090109>