new package system proposal

[Gary Gatten]

This is the kinda B$ I'm talking about.  Trying to install krb5 from
ports, and after 2 hours (or more) of finding and compiling dependencies
and whatever else "make" does - it aborts!  WTF!!!  I'm sure when I try
to remove "heimdal-1.0.1" it will cause more problems that lead to more
problems....

===>  Installing for krb5-1.6.3_5

===>  krb5-1.6.3_5 conflicts with installed package(s):
      heimdal-1.0.1

      They install files into the same place.
      Please remove them first with pkg_delete(1).
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/ports/security/krb5.
*** Error code 1

Stop in /usr/ports/security/krb5.



-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Gatten 
Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2009 10:46 AM
To: 'n j'; User Questions
Subject: RE: new package system proposal

I haven't worked with *nix os's as much as FreeBSD - Well, maybe
different flavors of SCO but as far as installing apps and what not
mostly FreeBSD.  I've installed maybe half a dozen apps and NONE of them
took less than 2 - 3 days.  Part of that is my slow a$$ test system -
and my ignorance, but it seems like a MAJOR hassle for even the simplest
thing!

It could just be me, but seems like many developers choose to link to
other libraries/modules even if they just need one simple function they
could build into their source directly.  Hence a dependency is
"needlessly" created. Multiply this 500 times and installing a simple
app turns into a nightmare.

I'm definitely gonna start trying to use more packages than ports, but
the port system is necessary and eventually I get stuff working!

G


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
[mailto:owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org] On Behalf Of n j
Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2009 3:15 AM
To: User Questions
Subject: Re: new package system proposal

I'd like to use this opportunity to generally support this and any
other ideas taking direction of making binary installs and upgrades
easier and more manageable. I recognize the need for people to
configure custom options and compile from ports (that is why any new
system *must* be compatible with ports), however, it should be noted
that there's a lot of people running simple LAMP servers, almost
exclusively using default options, who would greatly benefit from
better binary package support.

I've already ranted about this
(http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2008-December/1881
19.html)
in a slightly different context (I talked about -SECURITY equivalent
instead of -DESKTOP that the OP suggests) with almost the same idea -
make it easy for people who are interested in running stable, secure
servers do binary upgrades without the hassle of going through a major
system recompile because of, for example, openldap shared library
version bump.

Regards,
-- 
Nino
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"





<font size="1">
<div style='border:none;border-bottom:double windowtext 2.25pt;padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in'>
</div>
"This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient
 and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential.
 If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
 any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email
 and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited.  If you have
 received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by
 return email and delete this email from your system."
</font>