Re: PKGBASE Removes FreeBSD Base System Feature

Hi Vermaden,

I really like your proposed approach.

At least , we should have a target for the pkg command. The target can be like (base / non-base ) , defaulting to non-base to avoid breaking current behavior.

For example “pkg upgrade -t base”, to act on FreeBSD base and “pkg upgrade” to perform actions on non-base packages.

Now , if then someone comes along and remove all using “pkg -t base delete -af”, well it’s his/her problem. 

For me the issues is not only doing a delete all and bricking the system , but also making an upgrade which might contain a base package without noticing. It’s easy not to see it if you have many packages installed.

On the other hand, if we do touch the base system, using the target base or any other mechanism , we should also make a good use of the boot environment’s infrastructure.

Best regards 
Santi


> On 8 Aug 2025, at 04:16, vermaden <vermaden@interia.pl> wrote:
> 
> One small 'patch' ...
> 
> - this is not unacceptable to say the least.
> + this is unacceptable to say the least.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Temat: Re: PKGBASE Removes FreeBSD Base System Feature
> Data: 2025-08-08 3:37
> Nadawca: "vermaden" &lt;vermaden@interia.pl>
> Adresat: "Sulev-Madis Silber" &lt;freebsd-current-freebsd-org111@ketas.si.pri.ee>; "freebsd-current@freebsd.org" &lt;freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org; freebsd-pkgbase@FreeBSD.org;
> 
>> 
>>> OK, Colin Percival just announced 15.0-PRERELEASE - yet
> the PKGBASE concept - besides 'kinda working' - does not holds to the POLA
> principle at all - and if anyone will chose to use PKGBASE instead of
> 'classic' install the 'pkg delete -af' will not only delete all the third
> party packages but will also WIPE almost ENTIRE BASE SYSTEM of FreeBSD ...
> this is not unacceptable to say the least.
>> 
>> My 'vote' here does not changed.
>> 
>> Lets keep pkg(8) for third party packages with:
>> - /etc/pkg
>> - /usr/local/etc/pkg
>> - /var/db/pkg
>> 
>> Lets have pkgbase(8) for FreeBSD Base System PKGBASE with:
>> - /etc/pkgbase
>> - /usr/local/etc/pkgbase
>> - /var/db/pkgbase
>> 
>> Its literally the same 'separation' as the Base System for binaries:
>> - /bin
>> - /usr/bin
>> - /sbin
>> - /usr/sbin
>> 
>> And /usr/local PREFIX for third party packages as:
>> - /usr/local/bin
>> - /usr/local/sbin
>> 
>> Regards,
>> vermaden
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Temat: Re: PKGBASE Removes FreeBSD Base System Feature
>> Data: 2025-08-07 2:10
>> Nadawca: "Sulev-Madis Silber"
> &lt;freebsd-current-freebsd-org111@ketas.si.pri.ee>
>> Adresat: freebsd-current@freebsd.org;
>> 
>>> 
>>>> what linux distros do here? extra options to avoid
>> deleting the basic things like kernel and minimal userland utils? if
> you
>> happen to make way too broad package deletion. i don't think linux
>> sysadmins want it either. even if you consider linux moving faster and
> with
>> less seatbelts ("allow shit like that" (c) vermaden). it's not pkg
> fault it
>> does wipe system clean if you asked it. also, des@ reminded me that
> pkg
>> replaced older tracking system 12 years ago. yet, i see pkg production
>> versions being released just recently with a bug that user immediately
>> notices. it was fixed because oops humans make mistakes. but it would
> be a
>> horror if pkg does those things when it manages the entire system.
> granted,
>> you can always boot at least external media when any "nuclear" pkg
> update
>> comes out. this one wasn't but... and one could say that pkgbase is
>> extensively discussed everywhere. but we still have discussions like
> this
>> here. even fights. what if you miss all those? i never knew 32bit is
> on the
>> way out until i happened to randomly read that warning from kernel
> boot
>> log. there are number of those things in fbsd. happened earlier,
> happened
>> lately. maybe it's inevitable. were you scared to install new major
> version
>> like 5 or 13 right away because who knows what will happen? luckily
> there
>> are 2, sometimes 3 majors to choose from should some of them include
> rushed
>> in late changes that turned out to be buggy. it feels like it got
> worse
>> lately. i mean more changes, more breaks. i don't know why this isn't
>> confined to current or stable. those are annoying type of changes.
>> hopefully pkgbase will not be switched on before it's done. but pkg
> for
>> ports still has issues and it's now default package manager here.
> feels
>> like too much hassle. there are many changes, i mean. good, but extra
> fuzz.
>> drm for gpus, wifi driver changes, wifi adapter firmware loading
> changes.
>> all with somebody complaining that (s)he didn't know there was
> breaking
>> change. i don't have had reason to run -af and not checking either but
> if
>> you had habit of doing that, it would be similar to rm ~ catching the
> /
>> along too. unsure what the fix is. (userland) utils and kernel
> printing it
>> out to console? over longer period of time? i mean i could understand
> that
>> change was discussed "everywhere", meetings, mailing lists. it would
> still
>> be missed. if i make something, which i only tried once, and publish
> it, i
>> would never expect them to be aware of changes i make. because release
>> notes, changelogs, those don't get attention. and you can still miss
> stuff.
>> i once told that correct procedure is to check everything throughly
> and
>> then upgrade, but i have passed this myself often. and have gotten
>> "fallouts" too. in fbsd the only thing i would need to stand back,
> squint
>> and duck is when booting new  current. when pkgbase gets out in
> installer,
>> i expect it to still have issues and i would rather stand back and
> watch
>> this "nuke" going off. because it does make radical changes. one of
> most
>> wtf is that now one needs to deal /etc in new ways. and if those
> differ
>> from mergemaster or etcupdate, it would make somebody mad. perhaps
> even
>> worse than i could. in my mind, changes are good. if they are
> reasonable.
>> and known. probably knowing is biggest issue. what if one misses all
> those
>> 10 different places? i never checked, does freebsd-update tell that
> pkgbase
>> is coming? does buildworld, maybe installworld tell that? that i
> actually
>> used and i don't see it. because those are like places where you see
> it. i
>> can't recall if ports warned of pkgng coming soon? i also prefer if
> those
>> messages would include plans and not final decisions to make a change.
> i
>> haven't tries pkgbase myself, maybe i will, maybe i don't. unsure what
> fix
>> is. maybe start putting things right into where everyone sees it.
> unsure.
>> and if i were you, whoever leads pkgbase initiative in "high castle"
> (it
>> does feel like this!), i would not let users delete base with -af.
> it's
>> rather unusual anyway and i don't think not deleting would get people
> as
>> mad as deleting stuff. i can't recall what was it, was it repo manager
> on
>> linux distro or something else but something wanted you to write whole
>> sentence, observing caps and so on. then it executed that irreversible
>> operation. in my systems, i've been configured things to ask date
> &amp; times
>> when i really wanted to not do anything stupid. that would get
> somebody's
>> brain working and maybe they interrupt their autopilot mode if they
> didn't
>> actually want it. trust me, deleting freebsd-kernel, removing
> freebsd-bin,
>> pkg-bootstrap... isn't what you want to see, then it's too late. and
> yes,
>> add echos to installworld end and freebsd-update if it's not there
> already
>> because that's what people see
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On August 7, 2025 1:21:32 AM GMT+03:00, vermaden
>> wrote:
>>>> So You still do not understand ...
>>>> 
>>>> The pkg(8) command works fine - its just NOT SUPPOSE to DESTROY most
>> of the FreeBSD Base System - because FreeBSD is not Linux to allow
> shit
>> like that ...
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Temat: Re: PKGBASE Removes FreeBSD Base System Feature
>>>> Data: 2025-08-07 0:13
>>>> Nadawca: "Ceri Davies" &lt;ceri@submonkey.net>
>>>> Adresat: "vermaden" &lt;vermaden@interia.pl>;
>>>> DW: FreeBSD-pkgbase@freebsd.org; freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org;
>> freebsd-current@freebsd.org; freebsd-stable@freebsd.org;
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 6 Aug 2025, at 22:54, vermaden  wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> No, it has the same behaviour.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> English is not my primary language so I will try to explain in
>>> more
>>>>> simple words as you probably did not understood.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> NOPE.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> It DOES NOT has the same behavior.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> In each case it forcibly deletes all the packages from your
>> system,
>>>>> like you asked.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I understood you fine, I just disagree that this is a shocking
>>> result
>>>>> when you have specified the “all” and “force” flags.  In
>> fact
>> it is
>>>> exactly what that command is documented to do and therefore is very
>> far
>>>> from a violation of the principle of least astonishment.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ceri
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>