Re: Remove BIND, Sendmail, Perl and etc from base?

[Mark Wolfe <wolfem@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

From a user/sysadmin point of view I am all for a package system like 
the one debian.

On Wednesday, July 23, 2003, at 10:10  AM, Craig Dooley wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I definitely agree that the user system should be built using packages.
> People dont care about downloading a 300meg source tree and waiting an 
> hour
> to get a new release.  Yes rpm systems are a hassle to upgrade, but 
> debian
> has shown that you dont need source for a system.  Debian allows 
> someone to
> do dpkg --get-selections > profile and have a list of programs to 
> duplicate a
> current working system.  I like the environment idea to allow multiple
> instances of needed dependancies (it would fix things like debian with 
> libpng
> or freebsd with freetype) but unless I am missing something, we're 
> still
> gonna need a build system to create these packages.  Also, a database 
> backed
> approach seems the easies way to conserve bandwidth and allow full 
> updates.
> In my opinion, in the end, we should have a "buildworld" just rebuild 
> all the
> base packages and update them that way.  People who care about the 
> source can
> get it just as easily, and people that dont won't ever have to worry.  
> Also,
> will ports stay with just a new backend for building packages?  Will 
> there be
> a new build environment?  A binary downloading frontend seems a 
> necessity now
> also.  Just my thoughts
>
>
> On Tuesday 22 July 2003 05:32 pm, Thierry Herbelot wrote:
> > Matthew Dillon wrote:
> > >     The eventual goal is to make *ALL* userland applications, 
> > > including
> > >     things like cp, ls, etc... all operate through the packaging 
> > > system,
> > >     and remember that it is the packaging system's goal to support
> > >     installation of multiple versions of anything without conflict.
> >
> > oh no ! please !
> >
> > a fine-grained packaging system used for the core OS is just a pain : 
> > I'm
> > fed up with DeathTrap or Mandrake or Suse or .... with their 
> > thousands of
> > rpm's
> > - how do you upgrade such a machine ? (with something intelligent like
> > portupgrade ? but there are lots of oldish shared libs left behind)
> > - how do you duplicate a machine ? (preferably with some automatic
> > procedure) after living some time, it's very difficult to know the 
> > smallest
> > set of base rpms you have to select to get the same install (with the 
> > other
> > packages going in via dependencies)
> >
> > One big selling point of FreeBSD is the relative ease of configuration
> > description : get the full OS, then add a smallish number of outside
> > packages.
> >
> >         TfH
>
> - --
> - -Craig
> cd5697@xxxxxxxxxx
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (FreeBSD)
>
> iD8DBQE/HdJhYXswu1EOVs0RAj4iAJsHi+qRvm90VPGUpTzNbz0QZydCegCglkE3
> 3OgUeRMZaa5sq/OWVtMr7lY=
> =lGnj
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----