Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 22:05:18 -0400 From: Steve Wills <swills@freebsd.org> To: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: pkgng suggestion: renaming /usr/sbin/pkg to /usr/sbin/pkg-bootstrap Message-ID: <785B5BAD-E015-4624-B3A1-D05E1BD97E51@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <CAF6rxg=TMbmwbhhmiGi_MfqjjE144pQAMNoR3ajTzR3n4Z5XLQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <97612B57-1255-4BB3-A6D3-FC74324C6D67@FreeBSD.org> <CAF6rxg=TMbmwbhhmiGi_MfqjjE144pQAMNoR3ajTzR3n4Z5XLQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Aug 23, 2012, at 9:57 PM, Eitan Adler wrote: > On 23 August 2012 18:19, Steve Wills <swills@freebsd.org> wrote: >> Hi, >>=20 >> It seems to me that renaming the pkg binary in /usr/sbin/pkg to = /usr/sbin/pkg-bootstrap would make sense. =46rom a user standpoint, it = is confusing that running the command gets different results the second = time it is run vs. the first time. I can imagine a user saying "I ran = pkg, but it didn't do what they said it would. Now I run it again, and = it does do what it is supposed to." Also, it would enable setting up a = pkg-bootstrap man page separate from the pkg man page, without confusion = about which one you're looking at. >>=20 >> So, opinions? There may still be time to fix it for 9.1 if we can = decide quickly. >=20 > no opinion on the name, but imho there should be *something* called > "pkg" on a fresh system. Users will install a new system, follow some > random how-to, and not realize they missed a step. If the default > package errors with exit code 1 and says "run pkgbootstrap first" that > is okay too. Why can't one of those steps be to run "pkg-bootstrap"? Steve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?785B5BAD-E015-4624-B3A1-D05E1BD97E51>