Mon, 29 May 2017 14:16:26 -0400 "H. Ishikawa" <[email protected]> > Hello, I'd like to ask some specific areas of the pkg_add tools. > > 1. Why Perl instead of C? > Perl is comparatively slow, and I think this limits who can contribute > to the source code. How many developers in OpenBSD are actively doing > any review of the pkg_add tools code? Would there be any interest in > porting pkgsrc or pkgng from another BSD, or rewriting it in C? > > 2. Why no package database file? > Other package managers like apt-get can fetch a single file that has > all the package versions/info in it. When I update my packages on > OpenBSD Current, it is a very slow process. Each package must be > individually checked for updates, rather than comparing a list of > what I have to a single list of the newest versions. This makes > doing updates very painful and I avoid doing it sometimes. > > 3. Why so many connections? > When I tried to investigate why the update was so slow, I saw that > pkg_add was making one HTTPS connection per package! Tools like > wget from Linux can reuse a single connection for many downloads. > Could this be added to pkg_add in OpenBSD? > > Thank you.
Hi hishi, I disagree with your statements - pkg tools are easy, reliable & quick. perlfaq - frequently asked questions about Perl http://man.openbsd.org/perlfaq OpenBSD::Intro - Introduction to the pkg tools internals http://man.openbsd.org/OpenBSD::Intro pkg_add - install or update software packages http://man.openbsd.org/pkg_add 1) Implementer gets to choose the tool, Perl is fast enough, confirmed. 2) This is one reliable approach, what others choose is not a template. 3) Because, tools evolve, please feel free to provide your improvement. From an independent user perspective, your arguments are kind of weak.. Kind regards, Anton Lazarov
