From nobody Mon Aug 04 15:33:38 2025 X-Original-To: freebsd-current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4bwgZJ2XMqz6498F; Mon, 04 Aug 2025 15:33:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=W2Kv=2Q=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (elsa.codelab.cz [94.124.105.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4bwgZH6Kdtz3q2Y; Mon, 04 Aug 2025 15:33:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=W2Kv=2Q=quip.cz=000.fbsd@elsa.codelab.cz) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 680B6D78B0; Mon, 4 Aug 2025 17:33:41 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=quip.cz; s=private; t=1754321621; bh=3OrNOCxqamRJ74zhuHxBPc7HZi7cT85rtpbgGg1T7xQ=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=ZVEtAQUd7niVGJwe6HTLd5LvAodPYHZwobMNpo6AtCuNebYzuC8Dk17nvTTS4hnGi Y/C+atu19BIV7jIuvGY3f7XgUeUXGsHIlGrgl1FfdfE4/BzDs6j0xKQVzJ/t0+pqYy fk+acOTNHqCcrRmU1xebQgPgRa6AWdwmqjZxt8mg= Received: from [192.168.145.49] (ip-89-177-27-225.bb.vodafone.cz [89.177.27.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 95483D78A9; Mon, 4 Aug 2025 17:33:38 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=quip.cz; s=private; t=1754321618; bh=3OrNOCxqamRJ74zhuHxBPc7HZi7cT85rtpbgGg1T7xQ=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=0SzpXLqZNkDNOK/ujoBdRyXSJiGMHSj9qEnF0fUrHUJNfl722WUmjm9RH0410Ycs1 UViwTAbHyMXV4/vFS31W7Bg6OVuvZ7edB04D3fIVBTsSQkyR+FlI3CKbe977mdv216 7qmtpXUeP6vBDNxYjlRHRxW9oj6GnMah4hgnf5K4= Message-ID: <9a03be4d-4621-445c-980d-e63c7f163e78@quip.cz> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2025 17:33:38 +0200 List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: PKGBASE Removes FreeBSD Base System Feature To: David Chisnall Cc: vermaden , Shawn Webb , "freebsd-pkgbase@freebsd.org" , "freebsd-stable@freebsd.org" , "freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org" , "freebsd-current@freebsd.org" , pete@nomadlogic.org, bapt@freebsd.org, bane@pmf.uns.ac.rs References: Content-Language: en-US From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4bwgZH6Kdtz3q2Y X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:42000, ipnet:94.124.104.0/21, country:CZ] On 01/08/2025 16:22, David Chisnall wrote: > On 31 Jul 2025, at 02:57, Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> wrote: >> >> I would also like to separate it. Use one command to update (upgrade) >> 3rd party packages and another to update (upgrade) base packages. It >> is our workflow for the last 25+ years thus running one command to >> update both is really unexpected and unwanted. > > I disagree here.  If you *want* to separate them, then you can: you can > specify the repository that you want to upgrade explicitly.  But if you > do then you risk things like: > >  - I’ve upgraded my base system, but not my ports-kmods things, so now > my GUI doesn’t start. >  - I’ve upgraded ports, but the ports tree is built on a newer point > release and I need to upgrade to make some symbols exist. >  - I’ve upgraded the base system and now some kmods from ports don’t work. > > All of these are things that users have complained about publicly in the > last year or so. > > I have avoided them by always doing `freebsd-update install && pkg > upgrade` and keeping that in my shell history[1] so I don’t accidentally > forget to upgrade both together. > > Given a choice between a thing that works for users, or something that > *can* work for users but comes with a bunch of footguns that they need > to avoid, I’d pick the former. > > David > > [1] I’ve noticed on fresh installs, the default shell no longer has > working persistent history, which is a *big* POLA violation, if people > want to complain about something. I see your point, but our workflow is much different. One command to upgrade base and packages at the same time is like "one to break it all" to me. I have seen broken "pkg upgrade" so many times... but it never breaks base and running ssh so I am still able to fix it somehow.. Running FreeBSD for more than 25 years on tens of machines (headless servers) and I never need to do upgrade of base and packages at the same time. I am not saying nobody need it. Yes it can be useful on upgrading desktops or other installations with kmods, but I think it still can be done in 2 separate steps to keep the base untouched if user wants it. Mainly when there is another step needed - etcupdate. Having base and packages upgraded and only then fixing conflicts with etcupdate seems very bad idea to me. Kind regards Miroslav Lachman