Re: avoiding wayland and pkgbase

On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 13:15:25 +0100
Bob Bishop <rb@gid.co.uk> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> > On 19 Aug 2025, at 12:23, Vadim Goncharov <vadimnuclight@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 11:30:34 +0100
> > void <void@f-m.fm> wrote:
> > 
> >> On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 04:38:05PM +0100, Lexi Winter wrote:
> >>> void:  
> >>>> Will we, after pkgbase becomes the default, still be able to build
> >>>> world from downloaded sources?  
> >>> 
> >>> building world from source is required to create the pkgbase packages in
> >>> the first place, so yes, but i suspect what you mean is will you be able
> >>> to upgrade the system using installkernel/installworld without having to
> >>> build packages and upgrade using pkg, in which case yes, nothing will
> >>> change about that process in 15.0.  
> >> 
> >> OK, thanks for confirming. I hope the buildworld/installworld process
> >> (doesn't involve pkg) *never* goes away. Not for *any* freebsd version.
> >> At the moment, one can build and install RELENG, not just -stable or current.
> >> I should have given examples of why I think this way in my initial post,
> >> sorry. To explain why, here are some reasons:
> >> 
> >> 1. a problem happens with a thing in base. It might affect just my
> >>    less common use case. A helpful and clueful person makes a patch.
> >>    I can apply and install it and not have to reboot if it's userland.
> >>    Useful if one is running essential external services and downtime
> >>    needs to be planned.
> >> 
> >> 2. When building a system, it helps to build what is required and no more.
> >>    This decreases the attack surface of the installation somewhat.
> >>    Subsequent builds against the same src.conf enforce this configuration.
> > 
> > I think converting the wrong way = to thousand packages (instead of right way 
> > "1 for kernel, 1 for freebsd.org origin + ~100 = for every in contrib") was
> > exactly for every knob to not build more?
> > 
> >> The above two points make freebsd as OS very versatile IMO.
> >> 
> >> 3. Sometimes pkg breaks. I've not yet seen 'make' break.
> > 
> > I foresee this the main problem with pkgbase when it will get mass deployment.
> > Like those chicken-egg problem typical to Linux distros on major upgrades due
> > to fact they don't have real base system, separate from packages - which is
> > (was) strength of FreeBSD.
> 
> +1
> 
> I think that fragmenting the base system is a Very Bad Idea. There could certainly be a debate about exactly what should constitute base, but it should be as integral as possible.

Fragmenting base into multiple packages is not always a bad idea,
until the whole base is developed / managed "as a whole".

Imagine about deploying into small embedded SBCs.
In many cases, this kind of environment does not require self-hosted
develpment toolchains, more, not always require all executables /
libraries.

Fragmented packages would ease much for such a resource-limited
use-cases.

Of course, managing / developing per-fragmented-parts is quite
a bad idea.

> > -- 
> > WBR, @nuclight
> > 
> 
> --
> Bob Bishop
> rb@gid.co.uk


-- 
Tomoaki AOKI]    <junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp>