Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 03:21:58 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Moving Things [was Re: List of things to move from main tree] Message-ID: <20010217032158.A85153@mollari.cthul.hu> In-Reply-To: <2896.982407013@winston.osd.bsdi.com>; from jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com on Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 02:50:13AM -0800 References: <kris@obsecurity.org> <2896.982407013@winston.osd.bsdi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--FL5UXtIhxfXey3p5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 02:50:13AM -0800, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > Well, I think that's true in some sense but also represents putting > the cart before the horse if you take this point too literally. The > problem really isn't in the installer since the list of choices it > presents simply reflect the degree of "componentization" already in > the system, and much of what sysinstall currently does by way of > adding packages is just a front-end interface to the functionality > provided by pkg_add. The installer is supposed to be little more than > a fancy wrapper, not a major instrument of policy. Well, currently the installer does impose policy by virtue of the source components being in one menu and the ports in another, with all of the "src-like" bits like 44bsd-more, 44bsd-csh, etc, jumbled in amongst the crap like GNOME and four million versions of breakout. So under the current regime we have to work within the confines of source distributions being afforded greater status than ports. That's where the troubles come from, and I agree this needs to change. > To put it another way, if you create a clean organizational structure > with the appropriate XML metadata describing it (vs our very > simplistic INDEX type of information now) then the installer WILL > treat the packages and source code/binary distributions exactly the > same because the underlying framework it depends on will see no > distinction itself. The actual UI work in building menus and list > boxes out of the index information provided is pretty trivial by > comparison. That might be one way to go, but it's clear to me that any change needs to become manifest in sysinstall, being the interface to installing the various bits of software, and the rest will attend to itself. The most obvious way to handle this (not requiring any fancy XML ports tree rearchitecturing) would be to just rip out the sysinstall code which treats distributions separately and rewrite it to use packages. There is nothing preventing us from installing the base system as packages right now, except that sysinstall demands those bits to be distributions. > > Has there been any progress from BSDi about this? ISTR some of your > > guys were working on it. >=20 > They're actually working on the update mechanism, though by "they" I > should also say "he" since I lost half the team when it went back to > college. :) Good to hear there's continued progress in the related area. Kris --FL5UXtIhxfXey3p5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE6jl7VWry0BWjoQKURAqtQAJ4yxELMxU04kb7DUyjX52SdNCnW9gCdGntE vGS1OeemlpJJNMb//4HlOSk= =kUc+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --FL5UXtIhxfXey3p5-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010217032158.A85153>