From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 31 16:02:55 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48DC51065674; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 16:02:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from utisoft@gmail.com) Received: from mail-bk0-f54.google.com (mail-bk0-f54.google.com [209.85.214.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DF938FC1B; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 16:02:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bkcje9 with SMTP id je9so1661697bkc.13 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 09:02:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=+0co0ku58fwElUaZ7pKa2aEClJzr8uAAh2EDw8R44O4=; b=xFnz/4L77hJ/v2fslcvwfu+0/Qnb4juxOaZSzpeN03t5VNkHVendIjg8xHcGbFOjr7 45zFzDmwHaNoWCKPkuFrnY6cPWh8U/PfNaHCHPtpY7zrBIWTOQmYQmiFLc9+65z4ZqzU J0c5z/yjrmTibd5Acxdsmtc0XE82m0AxSJkjgayFZhrUsyyv15xQjEpEnbI7FCFFGleU fhsDC/clWpWPIemX5YlUHrdfPh9nW3J/xCxoOglP/nM+zXWUwys5w0T32eEH3lam7nJG pztmS8/NpOP4glKGo0jwtIBa/JfyaXMD04FJdsROVgVJ4xHUQ81K3jO/5T4VDniqTrD/ 2KdA== Received: by 10.205.118.138 with SMTP id fq10mr4636726bkc.58.1346428973391; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 09:02:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.10.141 with HTTP; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 09:02:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5040DCA6.5090108@coosemans.org> References: <97612B57-1255-4BB3-A6D3-FC74324C6D67@FreeBSD.org> <503FF0EE.2020605@FreeBSD.org> <20120831095910.GQ64447@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <201208310810.50725.jhb@freebsd.org> <20120831122211.GS64447@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <5040DCA6.5090108@coosemans.org> From: Chris Rees Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 17:02:23 +0100 Message-ID: To: Tijl Coosemans , freebsd-current , FreeBSD Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Subject: Re: pkgng suggestion: renaming /usr/sbin/pkg to /usr/sbin/pkg-bootstrap X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 16:02:55 -0000 On 31 August 2012 16:47, Tijl Coosemans wrote: > On 31-08-2012 14:22, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 08:10:50AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: >>> On Friday, August 31, 2012 5:59:10 am Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >>>> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 01:02:06PM -1000, Doug Barton wrote: >>>>> I agree with John on all counts here. Further, the idea of a >>>>> self-installing package, at least for the pkg stuff itself, addresses >>>>> the issue that someone else brought up about how to handle installation >>>>> of pkg by the installer for a new system. >>>> >>>> I like the idea of also providing a self-installing package, and it seems really >>>> easy to do, so I'll try to see what I can do in this area I'll wrote a PoC in 5 >>>> minutes which looks pretty good, this could also be a very simple and easy way >>>> to integrate into bsdinstaller. >>>> >>>> I'll do work in that direction. >>>> >>>> Still it doesn't solve the problem of boostrapping pkgng in a fresh new box, >>>> because the user may not know where to download the pkg-setup.sh. >>> >>> I do think that is something bsdinstall should be able to handle, and I would >>> certainly want bsdinstall to include a dialog that says "do you want to install >>> the package manager?" >> >> Of course this is being worked on by dteske@ on his bsdconfig scripts, so yes in >> anycase the bsdinstaller will end up with a boostrap dialog to install pkgng. > > ...using a mechanism that will be supported for the lifetime of the release. > > My concern is that the problem with the pkg tools was never that they were > tied to FreeBSD releases. If that were true then you cannot accept the > bootstrap solution above because it has exactly the same "problems". > > The problem in my opinion was simply that the source code lived in src where > ports developers didn't have good access to it. And the solution for that is > to turn pkg development into a third party project and import that into base > from time to time. There can also be a port for it so people can use more > recent versions if they want to. That's the situation for several third > party tools in base. > > Given that the ports tree is currently supporting both the old and new pkg > tools I don't think it would be a problem for them to support older versions > of pkgng when the time comes, especially since the database used by pkgng is > much more flexible and you can execute any sql query on it. Absolutely not. This is close to the top reason pkg has been moved to ports-- it should not be in base, because then we're stuck with supporting that version for a very long time. Chris