Re: PKGBASE Removes FreeBSD Base System Feature

On Aug 1, 2025, at 07:22, David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org> 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.

PkgBase does not remove the issue that updating the kernel
first, rebooting, and then updating the world can be a
requirement. (World should get a later reboot as well.)

Last I knew PkgBase did not manage this sequence of itself,
even for when kmods are not involved. I selectively update
the kernels first and reboot before updating teh other
PkgBase packages. (The plural 'kernels' is because I'm
using main and have all the PkgBase kernels installed.
One can not do that for non-main for contexts with .dtb
files involved: conflicts.)

Is it always safe to update all the ports-kmods before the
world is updated so they are in place for the after-kernel
reboot with the old world?

If not, then PkgBase is not of itself a way of making the
handling automatic as far as I can tell.

>  - 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.
> 


===
Mark Millard
marklmi at yahoo.com