Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 24 Aug 2012 21:00:54 -0400
From:      Glen Barber <gjb@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Jonathan Anderson <jonathan.robert.anderson@gmail.com>
Cc:        ports@freebsd.org, Steve Wills <swills@freebsd.org>, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org>, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>, current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: pkgng suggestion: renaming /usr/sbin/pkg to /usr/sbin/pkg-bootstrap
Message-ID:  <20120825010054.GB1345@glenbarber.us>
In-Reply-To: <DAE2E96E648E4607A997294B3461BECB@gmail.com>
References:  <97612B57-1255-4BB3-A6D3-FC74324C6D67@FreeBSD.org> <20120824081543.GB2998@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <50380269.6020003@FreeBSD.org> <67BB0A66-A9D2-4257-A91E-C249B8076A87@gmail.com> <20120825003346.GA1345@glenbarber.us> <DAE2E96E648E4607A997294B3461BECB@gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--LpQ9ahxlCli8rRTG
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 01:47:26AM +0100, Jonathan Anderson wrote:
> On Saturday, 25 August 2012 at 01:33, Glen Barber wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 01:25:15AM +0100, Jonathan Anderson wrote:
> > > On 24 Aug 2012, at 23:38, Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org (mailto:doug=
b@FreeBSD.org)> wrote:
> > > > Let me rephrase that more simply ... very few users are ever going =
to
> > > > need the bootstrapping tool that will be in the base.
> > >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > So, then they won't use it. I fail to see the problem here.
>=20
> I also fail to see the problem. :) Just to be clear, my post was
> arguing against Doug's assertion that few will use pkg's bootstrapper
> (and that this is a problem): I hope that pkgng and package sets
> will vastly increase the use of binary packages by FreeBSD consumers.
> =20

I was avoiding writing two separate emails about this thread - yes, I
did realize we had a similar point of view on this.  Sorry if it came
out differently.

> > /usr/sbin/pkg installs /usr/local/sbin/pkg without requiring the Ports
> > Collection to be available locally.
>=20
> Which is exactly the behaviour that I want: I view the ports tree
> as a last resort to be used only if binary packages fail to fulfil
> my needs. Sometimes I don't even bother fetching it. Once again,
> we may be in violent agreement here. :)
>=20

Understood.  I misinterpreted your last sentence.

What I would like to know, is why all the anti-progress emails[1] have
to wait until the Last Minute(tm) when information on pkgng availability
has been available for quite some time now.

Welcome to 2012.

[1] - Doing the same things we've done keeps us in the same place we've
been.

Glen


--LpQ9ahxlCli8rRTG
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD)

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJQOCPGAAoJEFJPDDeguUajGhoIALYeuhge8MCmhZ2KwhNBxwvi
sNBcE25EtIPkNTe/ikUZ5gRa1tp1LeLXCiPO/yetbsXNlq22m1VmxA/L/vg+Wp2B
lku5V97gHSyiJseZdFZx0ZK2EKglM7NbIrLOOKBPK9AtqSqF5Bp+Dpp6niElET+S
6KuEBOuigDKybiDMu8is8/SLiJe9aa0Sf3GPvSDVWcXKoXtE3gnQ6Y4JxsOfA6tn
8oI4GteORJFTrj8zPP6ArifnoWZ9e9bgIrwjdbzkkHotjAykk7e53R+Qu3tD7l7D
HGzl/sHFDGBPaI6ewIEuyDVB7svbtETbZSsoxRrPUZ6P+iE03HsR2NU9pcHYgn8=
=013n
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--LpQ9ahxlCli8rRTG--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120825010054.GB1345>