cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/pkg_install Makefile src/usr.sbin/pkg_install/add pkg_add.1 src/usr.sbin/pkg_install/create pkg_create.1 src/usr.sbin/pkg_install/delete pkg_delete.1 src/usr.sbin/pkg_install/info pkg_info.1 src/usr.sbin/pkg_install/search Makefile pkg_search.1 ...

[David O'Brien]

On Sun, Dec 09, 2007 at 11:01:58AM +0000, Kirill Ponomarew wrote:
>   Backout previous commit, since it's done without maintainers
>   approval.  These changes were approved by adding it as port to
>   ports/ tree, but not for src/.

You know - you should have asked me my motivation for adding this here.
I strongly feel it should be in the base system.

The existing pkg_* tools in the src/ are to get you started.
I can see how one could feel there is beauty in hosting package tools
within the ports collection itself.

However, we need to have sufficient pkg_* tools in src to get one
started.  That is why pkg_add is in src/.

We owe it to our users to make it easy to add or install a port.  In
order for a user to do that, they need to know the name (if pkg_add -r),
or location (if building themselves).  That is the problem pkg_search
solves.  In fact someone told me about a new port I would find useful.
In the end they gave me the wrong path to where it lives in /usr/ports
and it took more effort than it should have to figure out where it lives.
With pkg_search (in the base system) it would have taken only a second.

If something like pkg_search doesn't belong in src/, then why does
pkg_delete, pkg_sign, pkg_create, or pkg_version?

>   I talked to PR submitter and miwi@
>   some days ago and explained the reasons for it, the both were agree
>   to add it to ports/ only.

If this was on a public list I missed it.  What are you reasons for
denying it?

I would also like an opinion on what Portmgr must approve.  Anything in
the base system that is Ports Collection related?  Anything that changes
the existing pkg_* applications used by /usr/ports/Mk/*?  [that is what I
thought was covered]

-- David