Why not instead have a dedicated set of tooling for managing the base operating system? We kind of already have that and it works well with the FreeBSD philosophy. They are called `bsdinstall`, and `freebsd-update`. Can we simply convert/repurpose (and maybe even merge) and rename those tools to handle managing the operating system in a package like style. We just call it "freebsd-setup" or whatever. The point being that `pkg` is for ports/packages for third party software and `freebsd-setup` is for the operating system. The two should never cross paths.
On 8/7/2025 7:09 AM, DutchDaemon - FreeBSD Forums Administrator wrote:
On 8/7/2025 1:43 AM, Tomek CEDRO wrote:On Thu, Aug 7, 2025 at 12:21 AM vermaden <verma...@interia.pl> wrote:So You still do not understand ...The pkg(8) command works fine - its just NOT SUPPOSE to DESTROY most of the FreeBSD Base System - because FreeBSD is not Linux to allow shit like that ...+1 =) Base and Userland should be clearly separated, as it was, as it is, no matter how it will be organized internally (i.e. modular base) :-) Maybe its worth thinking about some sort of standard minimal fallback environment (rescue?) when base gets broken for any reason (i.e. broken pkgbase, broken modules, fs corruption, broken hardware, accident) to either restore last working configuration or recreate defaults with/from what can be saved? :-)Maybe this would be a good time to reserve the -b / --base flags in pkg(8) .. ?
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
