Re: Pacman?

["Pieter Dumon" <pieter.dumon@xxxxxxxxx>]

As a sidenote: someone is porting Portage from Gentoo/Linux over to
Dragonfly, and it's being ported to FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD.

This means both the (source-based) package installation infrastructure
(however,I don't know if they're replacing pkgsrc on NetBSD or using
it, for example), and the initscripts infrastructure. It's basically
bash+python under GPL (and now I hear some people saying "yuk!" ;-) ).

See http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gentoo-alt/bsd/index.xml

With portage, you can choose between being stable or using the latest
of the latest, with new package versions usually being integrated in
portage in just a couple of days or less (although being marked
unstable, that is). But pkgsrc-wip solves this.

It's more userfriendly with regard to dependencies and updates than
pkgsrc, but pkgsrc has its advantages, and there's a large amount of
effort put
into it to port it to DFly, so I think its better to put effort in
pkgsrc than in alternatives.


Pieter



On 8/16/06, Vivek Ayer <vivek.ayer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Whatever it may be, I like pacman, bash and all the other shells out there.
>
> Archlinux has many packages in its repository that require patching as
> well. This shouldn't be a giant hurdle. The thing is it would kind of
> be neat to write scripts in a different shell. This would also give
> the archlinux team some feedback. Frugalware, a distro that grew out
> of a love for pacman and Slackware uses bash scripts, but then again
> this shouldn't be the only shell to write things into. Pacman is open
> source, which means it can be rewritten and be licensed under BSD to
> be renamed to...i dunno...zacman (zsh)....or shacman (sh) or tschacman
> (tsch) or well you get the idea. This would give the dfly user base a
> chance to decide whether they prefer pkgsrc or pacman.
>
> I've used pkgsrc and I'm not a 100% comfortable with it. It doesn't do
> updates like pacman. Then again, pacman update is binary repo only and
> pkgsrc can do source. In archlinux, you would use ABS, so really
> pkgsrc does the job of two managers. But like it said on the pkgsrc
> wikipedia article, pkgsrc can be a good secondary package manager
> considering pacman does get ported to dfly, which I'm 100% willing to
> help in whatever shell you all want.
>
> Vivek