BIND REPLACE_BASE option

[Chris H]

On Mon, 12 Jan 2015 11:57:26 -0700 (MST) Warren Block <wblock at wonkity.com>
wrote

> On Mon, 12 Jan 2015, Chris H wrote:
> 
> > Here is where we will clash; I've been riding *BSD for over 20yrs.
> > It's *biggest* asset has been in it's flexibility -- it wasn't another
> > Linux "dist", that required me to essentially become a "clone" of
> > every other Linux install. The Ports system, and /src allowed one to
> > tailor my build/install to meet *my* needs. I wasn't required, in fact
> > I was *encouraged*, to have a unique system. Frankly the new pkg(8)
> > *requirement* was a complete 180 on this philosophy.
> 
> Huh?  It is the same as the old package system, required if you want to 
> use ports or packages.  The difference is that pkg is not in base, so it 
> can be easily upgraded without doing an OS upgrade.  Ports continue to 
> work as they did with the old package system, only package operations 
> are faster and more reliable.
Sure, it's intended to *feel* like pkg_, but the (way) it's implemented
bears little resemblance to pkg_, and it's implementation also *abruptly*
pulled the rug out from under many years of development work, carefully
crafted work by development shops to keep their stream flowing smoothly
and more efficiently. [I'm kicking a dead horse here]

> 
> My main complaint with pkg is the persistent misunderstanding that 
> binary packages are a direct replacement for ports.
> http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/pkg.html
I'd be inclined to agree here.

> 
> As for the original topic, BIND in base had the same upgrade problems as 
> the old package system.  The port overwriting the base was a convenient 
> but nasty hack.  Not even that convenient, because all that changes with 
> the port is the config files are in /usr/local/etc rather than /etc.  A 
> chroot adds little security or isolation, and if you want that it should 
> be in a jail or other type of VM anyway.
> https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/jails-ezjail.html#
Speaking of kicking "dead horses"; I'm still amazed that this topic
still continues. I remember the initial discussion on this about 9mos ago,
and thought;
OK. That seems to make sense. I'd better see if I can cobble up
something that mimic's the old setup, so I can keep things going, until
I find a suitable replacement for the BIND.
Took me less than 2hrs. Point being; there was a fair amount of time
before the BIND got yanked (unlike the pkg change). So I'm amazed so
many people are, well, amazed.

--Chris

---