Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 16:26:33 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Antoine Beaupre <anarcat@anarcat.ath.cx> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org, The Anarcat <anarcat@anarcat.dyndns.org>, freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: packaging base Message-ID: <3CC73F29.1C6B1DA2@mindspring.com> References: <F371CBE0-5796-11D6-A725-0050E4A0BB3F@anarcat.ath.cx>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Antoine Beaupre wrote: > Le Mercredi 24 avril 2002, =E0 11:12 , Mike Meyer a =E9crit : > > Your simple shell script has to prompt for floppies. That needs UI > > code. The people who know have decided that the current UI code isn't= > > up to snuff. Hence libh. > = > Come on.. The current package system and sysinstall are quite good at > prompting for a simple yes/no question. The issue is really not there, = I > think. Actually, the prompting is problematic. All such questions should, by definition, be front-loaded. Otherwise, you have to babysit the installation process, which is never a good thing. But that's beside the point: basically, any HCI (Human Computer Interaction) is, by definition, through a UI. > Libh is developping a UI, fine. But we need to develop a way to package= > base efficiently. A good first start would be to have it be composed of packages instead of distfiles, and to have a mandatory/optional flag. Actually, wasn't Eric Melville already dealing with this? > I'm concerned with getting base packaged. It shouldn't be too hard to > package base in either libh or classic pkgtools once the framework is i= n > place. > = > I'm concerned that since libh doesn't currently aim at handling the > current bin.xx brute-force system, it will need base to be packaged in > order to install a running system. That's an incredibly positive thing (IMO). -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3CC73F29.1C6B1DA2>