Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2025 13:17:27 -0700 From: Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> To: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@freebsd.org>, dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org Subject: Re: git: 23e69b54973f - main - pkgbase: set origin for each packages as base/FreeBSD-* Message-ID: <BE3B73E5-5B36-4AF9-B264-3F3E7442C2C4@yahoo.com> References: <BE3B73E5-5B36-4AF9-B264-3F3E7442C2C4.ref@yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav <des_at_FreeBSD.org> wrote on Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2025 19:37:40 UTC : > Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> writes: > > pkgbase: set origin for each packages as base/FreeBSD-* > >=20 > > MFC After: 3 day > > Reviewed by: ivy > > Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D52689 >=20 > I'm not convinced this was a good idea. Having the same origin made it > trivial to identify base packages in filter expressions ('%o =3D = base'). Note: Do not take the below as any solid preference for one over the other. It is more narrowly technically focused. Why would '%o~base/*' be insufficient for that specific purpose? For example: # pkg query -a -e '%o ~ base/*' "%o %n-%v" or: # pkg rquery -a -e '%o ~ base/*' "%o %n-%v" Just the issue of the old ports category that was removed? (I'm ignoring the period over which there are some older base packages that have not yet been regenerated that used the old origin naming and others that have been regenerated that have the newer origin naming.) > I understand that some people think package origins should be unique = and > complained loudly on the mailing lists, but subpackages already share > the same origin. Hmm. Will there ever be subpackages of a base package? (Nested sharing of a common base would result as things are?) (For all I know, it may well be that only port packages will ever have subpackages as a possibility.) =3D=3D=3D Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BE3B73E5-5B36-4AF9-B264-3F3E7442C2C4>