From owner-freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org Mon Apr 18 21:29:23 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkgbase@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D08ACB1333B; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:29:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alfred@freebsd.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B12AA1394; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:29:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alfred@freebsd.org) Received: from Alfreds-MacBook-Pro-2.local (unknown [IPv6:2601:645:8003:a4d6:e40e:f317:bae8:c89e]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A3EA3346DE31; Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:29:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: lev@FreeBSD.org, Glen Barber , Nathan Whitehorn References: <20160302235429.GD75641@FreeBSD.org> <57152CE5.5050500@FreeBSD.org> <9D4B9C8B-41D7-42BC-B436-D23EFFF60261@ixsystems.com> <20160418191425.GW1554@FreeBSD.org> <571533B8.6090109@freebsd.org> <20160418194010.GX1554@FreeBSD.org> <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Sean Fagan , freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Alfred Perlstein Organization: FreeBSD Message-ID: <571551AB.4070203@freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:29:15 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <57153E80.4080800@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Packaging the FreeBSD base system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:29:23 -0000 Guys please stop arguing about the number of packages. The high granularity is VERY useful! Managing large groups of small packages is much easier than just having large packages. All this can be done by meta-packages which depend on larger package groups. Later pkg can be augmented to "remove packages not explicitly installed" which would remove leaf packages. Example: you installed "base-debug" which pulls in let's say 50 small packages, later you want all of those removed, you can do something like: "pkg delete --leafs base-debug" which should delete "base-debug" and any dangling packages it pulled in not required by other pkgs. Huge thanks to the team that implemented this! thanks. -Alfred On 4/18/16 1:07 PM, Lev Serebryakov wrote: > On 18.04.2016 22:40, Glen Barber wrote: > >> This granularity allows easy removal of things that may not be wanted >> (such as *-debug*, *-profile*, etc.) on systems with little storage. On >> one of my testing systems, I removed the tests packages and all debug >> and profiling, and the number of base system packages is 383. > IMHO, granularity like "all base debug", "all base profile" is enough > for this. Really, I hardly could imagine why I will need only 1 debug or > profile package, say, for csh. On resource-constrained systems NanoBSD > is much better anyway (for example, my typical NanoBSD installation is > 37MB base system, 12MB /boot and 10 packages), and on developer system > where you need profiled libraries it is Ok to install all of them and > don't think about 100 packages for them. > > Idea of "Roles" from old FreeBSD installers looks much better. Again, > here are some "contrib" software which have one-to-one replacements in > ports, like sendmail, ssh/sshd, ntpd, but split all other > FreeBSD-specific code? Yes, debug. Yes, profile. Yes, static libraries. > Yes, lib32 on 64 bit system. > > It seems that it is ideological ("holy war") discussion more than > technical one... >