Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 15 Sep 2000 14:55:51 -0700
From:      Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group <Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca>
To:        James Howard <howardjp@glue.umd.edu>
Cc:        Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group <Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca>, Wilko Bulte <wkb@freebie.demon.nl>, Will Andrews <will@physics.purdue.edu>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Packages (was: Re: Rsh/Rlogin/Rcmd & friends) 
Message-ID:  <200009152155.e8FLtr926417@cwsys.cwsent.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 15 Sep 2000 17:35:07 EDT." <Pine.GSO.4.21.0009151734410.1701-100000@z.glue.umd.edu> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <Pine.GSO.4.21.0009151734410.1701-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>, 
James Howard writes:
> On Fri, 15 Sep 2000, Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group wrote:
> 
> > things.  I think the opposite is true: Not using packages is the BSD 
> > approach, then there's the package approach that the rest of the world 
> > uses.
> 
> On the other hand, this is one of the reasons I prefer FreeBSD.

I prefer FreeBSD because it's quality software.  The fact that it 
doesn't use packages is IMO a negative, however the quality of the 
software far outweighs this significant negative.  If FreeBSD was 
installed using packages I'd consider myself having my cake and eating 
it too.

What RedHat does, requiring you to select each individual RPM is silly. 
 IBM's approach (I spent 19 years of my career as an MVS Systems 
Programmer so I draw upon that experience as my preference) where the 
Systems Programmer would install the package and with the appropriate 
option SMP/E (MVS's package manager) would install all pre-requisites 
and co-requisites.  I would normally run SMP/E with the "check" option 
first to see what it would install for me, then run it for real to 
actually do the install.  Some packages were distributed as binary only 
and others were installed as source and binary.

The MVS systems programmer would apply patches (PTF's or APAR fixes) to 
packages (Functions or FMID's).  If I as the System's Programmer wanted 
to modify a piece of the O/S I would build a USERMOD.  The hierarchical 
nature of SMP/E would discard my USERMODS, notifying me of course, when 
any of my USERMODS were being updated by an FMID (package), PTF 
(patch), APAR (temporary patch), or another USERMOD (specifically 
written to supercede a prior USERMOD).

Implementing packages into FreeBSD would radically change the way 
releases are created so if we do something like this, it needs to be 
carefully thought out well in advance of implementation, e.g. 99% of 
all the issues need to be hashed out long before the first piece of 
code is written.  Implementation cannot be taken lightly.


Regards,                       Phone:  (250)387-8437
Cy Schubert                      Fax:  (250)387-5766
Team Leader, Sun/DEC Team   Internet:  Cy.Schubert@osg.gov.bc.ca
Open Systems Group, ITSD, ISTA
Province of BC            






To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200009152155.e8FLtr926417>