Dear,
Sorry for the noise,
I am agree with the proposal of Daniel Morant.
Do it as freebsd-setup: keep the FreeBSD philosophy in mind and UNIX one too.
Regards
Yves Guerin
Le jeudi 7 août 2025 à 10:58:35 UTC−4, Daniel Morante <dan...@morante.net>
a écrit :
I gave this more thought. Maybe the problem here is the approach? Why
should we use the `pkg` tooling for this?
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) .. ?
>
