Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2025 15:22:18 +0100 From: David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org> To: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> Cc: vermaden <vermaden@interia.pl>, Shawn Webb <shawn.webb@hardenedbsd.org>, "freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org" <freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-stable@freebsd.org" <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org" <freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-current@freebsd.org" <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, pete@nomadlogic.org, bapt@freebsd.org, bane@pmf.uns.ac.rs Subject: Re: PKGBASE Removes FreeBSD Base System Feature Message-ID: <DF25C123-E233-4EEF-86F2-AD536BA2F397@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <a9e07520-eddd-4e55-abab-cf7ecd426c24@quip.cz> References: <gblzvammhkzqxmwduyap@vpbk> <na7zou5skn2rcvyoigjgnnlzaomqsx23aj7dq3epq5ds65cu4y@ukgxp5zsj7j7> <fozdqxvxzylwxyvzfrmt@fobq> <a9e07520-eddd-4e55-abab-cf7ecd426c24@quip.cz>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] On 31 Jul 2025, at 02:57, Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> wrote: > > I would also like to separate it. Use one command to update (upgrade) 3rd party packages and another to update (upgrade) base packages. It is our workflow for the last 25+ years thus running one command to update both is really unexpected and unwanted. I disagree here. If you *want* to separate them, then you can: you can specify the repository that you want to upgrade explicitly. But if you do then you risk things like: - I’ve upgraded my base system, but not my ports-kmods things, so now my GUI doesn’t start. - I’ve upgraded ports, but the ports tree is built on a newer point release and I need to upgrade to make some symbols exist. - I’ve upgraded the base system and now some kmods from ports don’t work. All of these are things that users have complained about publicly in the last year or so. I have avoided them by always doing `freebsd-update install && pkg upgrade` and keeping that in my shell history[1] so I don’t accidentally forget to upgrade both together. Given a choice between a thing that works for users, or something that *can* work for users but comes with a bunch of footguns that they need to avoid, I’d pick the former. David [1] I’ve noticed on fresh installs, the default shell no longer has working persistent history, which is a *big* POLA violation, if people want to complain about something. [-- Attachment #2 --] <html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="overflow-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;">On 31 Jul 2025, at 02:57, Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> wrote:<br><div><blockquote type="cite"><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div><span style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: SourceCodePro-Regular; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; float: none; display: inline !important;">I would also like to separate it. Use one command to update (upgrade) 3rd party packages and another to update (upgrade) base packages. It is our workflow for the last 25+ years thus running one command to update both is really unexpected and unwanted.</span><br style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: SourceCodePro-Regular; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;"></div></blockquote></div><br><div>I disagree here. If you *want* to separate them, then you can: you can specify the repository that you want to upgrade explicitly. But if you do then you risk things like:</div><div><br></div><div> - I’ve upgraded my base system, but not my ports-kmods things, so now my GUI doesn’t start.</div><div> - I’ve upgraded ports, but the ports tree is built on a newer point release and I need to upgrade to make some symbols exist.</div><div> - I’ve upgraded the base system and now some kmods from ports don’t work.</div><div><br></div><div>All of these are things that users have complained about publicly in the last year or so. </div><div><br></div><div>I have avoided them by always doing `freebsd-update install && pkg upgrade` and keeping that in my shell history[1] so I don’t accidentally forget to upgrade both together.</div><div><br></div><div>Given a choice between a thing that works for users, or something that *can* work for users but comes with a bunch of footguns that they need to avoid, I’d pick the former.</div><div><br></div><div>David</div><div><br></div><div>[1] I’ve noticed on fresh installs, the default shell no longer has working persistent history, which is a *big* POLA violation, if people want to complain about something.</div></body></html>home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?DF25C123-E233-4EEF-86F2-AD536BA2F397>