Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2026 11:06:18 +0100 From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> To: Benjamin Jacobs <freebsd@dev.thsi.be>, vermaden <vermaden@interia.pl> Cc: "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: separation of pkgbase from pkg Message-ID: <049307ed-1060-4ba6-bb23-b693018db03d@quip.cz> In-Reply-To: <20260223015019.46e9fd61@t14> References: <0iqhe92aheNJohSnhh8-hXkXhQsaRG4D64nLTlTSIPgd6Iit07IwlMwmn-mIS-Qtp9KuZElphybTlYDIVTUDcVGpHWaUbQVGPKt53NSL5Jg=@proton.me> <1678741437.20260206163514@yahoo.com> <07af999d-3c7b-4fe2-8ed2-a37cf89b663b@quip.cz> <b0b4da1b-7137-460a-bc2f-5b9021a1426b@app.fastmail.com> <CAOjFWZ4zHpeXyUNDyg_M9dzcaPS9NezouYDq=ZigZffZ_7ozwQ@mail.gmail.com> <ef57b271-97c9-4d44-a9c1-55c33961cbea@app.fastmail.com> <3089fd20-9978-4d0f-b6d8-0ed51742e471@quip.cz> <1588b965-b77e-43d0-8e7d-f522994af658@gmail.com> <zgyeljzrjaeipltctjws@pfkd> <20260223015019.46e9fd61@t14>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 23/02/2026 02:50, Benjamin Jacobs wrote: > On Fri, 20 Feb 2026 22:29:35 +0100 > vermaden <vermaden@interia.pl> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I tried to propose the same thing even before FreeBSD 15.0-RELEASE >> was released here: >> - >> https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-pkgbase/2025-July/000596.html >> >> To have pkgbase(8) command with separate configs/paths nad SQLite >> database for Base System while leaving current pkg(8) with its own >> paths and database for third party packages ... but there was no >> interest. > > Hi, > > One of the problems with this approach is that it breaks the dependency > that ports can have on a base package. This is an extremely useful > feature allowing to install a really small set of base packages while > having the confidence that any missing piece required by a port gets > automatically installed. I understand why you find this feature very useful, but what is good for one person may be bad for someone else. Until now, all FreeBSD installations were essentially the same. The same installed programs, commands, tools. If base components are installed as dependencies of port packages, we enter the world of Linux—I log into a customer's machine, want to open a configuration file in Vi/Vim, and find that it is not installed on the system because the administrator prefers Pico or something else. And many times I am in the role of a user who does not even have permission to install packages. I haven't had to deal with this problem once in a quarter of a century on FreeBSD because all machines always had the same tools in base. And I personally find the idea that a simple installation of a ports package will interfere with base, install additional dependencies, update them, and even delete them in case of an error, really scary. > Personnaly I don't think that it would be a wise way forward. Mostly > due to the increase in complexity, bug surface and chance of errors. > If one wish to do that today, it is just a matter exporting a couple of > environment variables. I've done it... and stopped for the reasons > exposed ;-) > > > Best regards, > > Benjamin > > P.S.: one thing that I seem to be missing with pkgbase is the creation > of /boot/kernel.old when installing a new kernel (or maybe I just need > to rtfm?) I think not only this. AFAIK pkg is not creating BE before installing upgrade of base as freebsd-update does. And I don't know how well is handled the case where with the source build you can install kernel & world but keep all old libraries so you can keep old ports packages installed without breaking them by system version upgrade. Kind regards Miroslav Lachmanhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?049307ed-1060-4ba6-bb23-b693018db03d>