Tomek CEDRO <to...@cedro.info> writes:
> Not really. So far "the FreeBSD standard" kept things "similar" for
> over 30 years. If we traveled back/forward in time we would still use
> the same approach to configure and run stuff. Maybe except pkg-add was
> replaced with pkg, but still all locations are the same, configuration
> files format, ports build, etc.
I'm sorry but that's pure fantasy. In the last 30 years, we've switched
our init system twice, the main system configuration moved from
/etc/sysconfig to /etc/rc.conf, and we later added /etc/rc.conf.d and
per-service subdirectories. The ports tree is also completely different
from what it was 15 years ago, let alone 30: we've switched to staged,
unprivileged builds, we've added USES and FLAVOR, we switched the
primary identifier from the origin to PKGNAME, we switched to pkg (which
is a much bigger change than you seem to realize)... If anything, the
separation between base and ports is stronger now than ever, because we
used to allow ports to install files outside of ${LOCALBASE} and even
replace parts of the base system.
Packaged base has been in the works for a decade and it's going in.
There are rough edges, but we'll sort them out and the end result will
be much, much easier to manage for everybody than what we have now. By
the time FreeBSD 16.0 comes around, it will be second nature, and you
will have a hard time remembering what the fuss was all about.
> > [...] packages installed from ports might depend on packages from
> > the base system [...]
> This statement is extremely dangerous. It touches clue of this
> discussion. It seems to reveal planning to totally break current
> FreeBSD design / architecture? So far "base" could work without
> "userland", provided consistent, coherent, and predictable working
> environment. Everyone had the same set of "base" tools where
> "userland" could be built on top, so every system could be different
> but had exactly the same base. I can see that "base" will not be
> coherent for everyone anymore. If ports start depending on base
> packages then circular dependencies will arise and this will be a
> Linux-like-mess, because there could be different versions of base
> packages for different port versions that will depend on different
> versions of base packages. Then all will be just a package and there
> will be no "coherent FreeBSD base" anymore right? Then 14-RELEASE will
> hit end-of-lie and people will be _forced_ to switch to 15-RELEASE or
> move away to different BSD. This sounds like FreeBSD is going full
> Linux :-(
It's bad form to quote a large paragraph without summarizing, but this
is so unhinged I couldn't figure out what to cut. It's completely off
the wall, starting with the use of “userland”, a well-established term
meaning “code that isn't part of the kernel”, to mean... something else
that I can't quite figure out. But also, there is nothing circular at
all about ports depending on base. That's the way it's always been,
even if we didn't explicitly record it in package metadata (apart from
the shlib login in recent versions of pkg).
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - d...@freebsd.org
