Hiten Pandya wrote:
Can we not just go with an established packaging suite like the one
found in Debian and modify it for our use?
It's certainly more established than pkgsrc, and has more packages.
Hiten Pandya
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hiten, i concur with you. In my opinio
Andreas Hauser wrote:
When labor is not that cheap, you need better technology
to accomplish similar. That is what ports/pkgsrc is. It makes
producing those packages much easier, so that less people
can produce more packages.
It is not so difficult to produce Debian packages. I have played
a l
talon wrote @ Wed, 17 Aug 2005 10:20:40 +0200:
> Andreas Hauser wrote:
> >
> > When labor is not that cheap, you need better technology
> > to accomplish similar. That is what ports/pkgsrc is. It makes
> > producing those packages much easier, so that less people
> > can produce more packages.
>
>
> > http://zorked.net/smart/doc/README.html
>
> wow. this one looks almost exactly like the system I had envisioned.
> That's for sure worth looking at. Couple it with a mighty build
> system/binary packaging system (portage/dpkg marriage style) and it's
> about perfect.
>
Portage indeed is a m
> I think you have an important point. The only way to have a reliable
> packaging system is to produce binaries of *all* the software you
> claim you are releasing.
A minor point: pkgsrc has regular quarterly releases for just this reason.
The 2005Q2 release is coming up, for instance. I would
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 10:20:40AM +0200, Michel Talon wrote:
> Andreas Hauser wrote:
> >
> >When labor is not that cheap, you need better technology
> >to accomplish similar. That is what ports/pkgsrc is. It makes
> >producing those packages much easier, so that less people
> >can produce more pac
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 12:26:37AM +0100, Hiten Pandya wrote:
> Can we not just go with an established packaging suite like the one found
> in Debian and modify it for our use?
Please, don't mix building packages with managing packages. Debian has
a lot of cool work done for the latter, but is co
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
Debian has
literally thousands of contributors, partly because the system is a
maintainance hell. I completely agree with Andreas on that.
I don't agree. Debian has > 1000 contributors because Linux is
infinitely more popular than *BSD, in particular for "political"
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 03:27:26PM +0200, Michel Talon wrote:
> >If you want to invest time, think about how apt-get can either be ported
>
> Apt-get has no extraordinary magic that portupgrade misses.
apt-get is more involved, but has it own problems as well. It does have
a somewhat simpler job
On 8/17/05, Michel Talon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Portage looks nice for the first time you use, until you hit a major
> > problem with it.
>
> I have never used portage, but a lot of people are very happy with it.
> But for sure i have encountered severe breakage in FreeBSD ports, so
> i d
As you said Joerg, that apt/dpkg* are good for managing packages then for
building them; this seems to be backed by Andreas as well.
One of the only reason why I am still holding onto pkgsrc is because it
has (atleast) some support for views or shall I say isolated installations
of same packag
Hiten Pandya wrote:
In my opinion, the option to build packages is only useful to people who
want extreme modifications to their applications. I am sure most
people, including me would not really care about source packages; I for
one would not bother building OpenOffice or KDE locally, tota
:
:Hiten Pandya wrote:
:
:>
:> In my opinion, the option to build packages is only useful to people who
:> want extreme modifications to their applications. I am sure most
:> people, including me would not really care about source packages; I for
:> one would not bother building OpenOffice or
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 04:26:21PM +0100, Hiten Pandya wrote:
> One of the only reason why I am still holding onto pkgsrc is because it
> has (atleast) some support for views or shall I say isolated installations
> of same package but different version; apart from that pkgsrc has no
> overall ad
On Wed, August 17, 2005 11:26 am, Hiten Pandya said:
> Another issue here, is that we have un-substantiated claims that FreeBSD
> port maintainers will not accept patch files to make ports work on
> DragonFly? I have yet to see any evidence on this matter.
I talked about something like that, tho
Matthew Dillon wrote:
Illusion. Every time I have ever used portupgrade, the result has
been a completely broken system. Every time.
This is nice to know, i was under the impression i was so dumb as
being unable to use portupgrade (yes, my experience is not far from
yours) when so
Michel Talon wrote:
Matthew Dillon wrote:
Illusion. Every time I have ever used portupgrade, the result has
been a completely broken system. Every time.
This is nice to know, i was under the impression i was so dumb as
being unable to use portupgrade (yes, my experience is not far
:
:Matthew Dillon wrote:
:
:>
:>Illusion. Every time I have ever used portupgrade, the result has
:>been a completely broken system. Every time.
:>
:
:This is nice to know, i was under the impression i was so dumb as
:being unable to use portupgrade (yes, my experience is not far from
On August 17, 2005 11:06 am, Michel Talon wrote:
> Matthew Dillon wrote:
> >Illusion. Every time I have ever used portupgrade, the result
> > has been a completely broken system. Every time.
> This is nice to know, i was under the impression i was so dumb as
> being unable to use portupgrad
Michel Talon wrote:
>
> This is nice to know, i was under the impression i was so dumb as
> being unable to use portupgrade (yes, my experience is not far from
> yours) when so many people swear on the bible that they regularly
> upgrade their machine with portupgrade without a single hiccup :-)
>
At 6:47 PM +0200 8/17/05, Michel Talon wrote:
Hiten Pandya wrote:
Extremely important to get binary package management right,
including dependency handling, (automatic) updating.
If it was not for these softs, and some other softs like Gnome,
which are constantly broken for any reason, i hav
--- Bob Bagwill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 17:10:44 -0400, Chris
> Pressey
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I agree strongly with your underlying theme,
> although I'd characterize
> > it slightly differently. It's not just about
> marketing, which sounds
> > sort of fri
As Joerg said earlier, why not rather look at _why_ people love to use
apt instead of pkg_*?
Can't we just try to make our own packaging system (like apt wich is
easy to use) wich could perhaps use packages as primary medium, but yet
provide a posibillity to compile software like we do with po
> Another issue here, is that we have un-substantiated claims that FreeBSD
> port maintainers will not accept patch files to make ports work on
> DragonFly? I have yet to see any evidence on this matter.
This is hardly the point is it? Its true enough that one could easily
view supporting Drago
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 22:54:32 +0200, Erik P. Skaalerud wrote:
> As Joerg said earlier, why not rather look at _why_ people love to use
> apt instead of pkg_*?
>
> Can't we just try to make our own packaging system (like apt wich is
> easy to use) wich could perhaps use packages as primary medium
Garance A Drosihn wrote:
I have had very good luck with portupgrade, on multiple freebsd
systems on multiple platforms. I do avoid the biggies like KDE
or Gnome, which obviously helps.
Since half the ports i have on my machine, if not 3/4 require one or the
other of Gnome libraries, using
Gabriel Ambuehl wrote:
Long story short: the perfect system doesn't yet exist. OSX .app
approach comes close but is totally different paradigm and not really
what a BSD should be after.
While strictly copying MacOSX is not an option, our dream package
management system should allow us to instal
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
[snip]
> I've worked with both and Gentoo was far easier to *completely* break.
1) I am not opposed to pkgsrc (versus ports). I have become neutral.
2) I am a big fan of gentoo portage (as a user, not a developer).
I've had (almost) zero problems in the four years
ejc wrote:
On 8/17/05, Michel Talon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have never used portage, but a lot of people are very happy with it.
But for sure i have encountered severe breakage in FreeBSD ports, so
i don't see any reason to despise the Gentoo work.
I run Gentoo at work and fight with por
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 05:04:28PM -0700, walt wrote:
> Are you complaining about portage wearing your developer hat, or
> your user hat?
In this case my user hat :-)
Joerg
/me goes back to deciding whether giving KDE another time is worth his
time.
Jon Dama wrote:
This is hardly the point is it? Its true enough that one could easily
view supporting DragonflyBSD as if it was just another major version
number of FreeBSD--even if the mechanisms are very ad-hoc.
Hmm, very debatable and delicate issue, I will leave answering this one
becaus
Matthew Dillon wrote:
...Every time I have ever used portupgrade, the result has
been a completely broken system. Every time.
Are you suggesting that YOU are a typical user??? I don't
think so!
I've had a few problems over the years, but far fewer than
I've had with the pkg_chk function
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 04:26:21PM +0100, Hiten Pandya wrote:
One of the only reason why I am still holding onto pkgsrc is because it
has (atleast) some support for views or shall I say isolated installations
of same package but different version; apart from that pkgs
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 02:39:20AM +0100, Hiten Pandya wrote:
> Semantical differences, at best, lets be honest. They really do not
> affect the bigger picture all that much and if they do, I would like to
> hear about them.
Sure, like I said -- the small things I started to really enjoy :-)
>
hmp wrote @ Thu, 18 Aug 2005 02:28:19 +0100:
> Well, to be honest with you Jon, I certainly haven't tried sending "compat
> patches" to Kris or any of the senior ports people so I am not going to
> judge on that basis. If someone has tried this and got denied, please
> speak up; this is a tang
35 matches
Mail list logo
