Re: 15* jails to build base packages

On Mon 08 Sep 20:57, Mark Millard wrote:
> Graham Perrin <grahamperrin_at_gmail.com> wrote on
> Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2025 01:40:43 UTC :
> 
> > If I'm not mistaken: when the 15.0-ALPHA1 installer uses base packages 
> > from FreeBSD Project-provided repos,
> 
> pkg gets pkgbase *.pkg files from the likes of:
> 
> https://pkg.freebsd.org/FreeBSD:*:*/base_*_[0-9]/ <https://pkg.freebsd.org/FreeBSD:*:*/base_*_/>
> 
> For example:
> 
> https://pkg.freebsd.org/FreeBSD:14:aarch64/base_release_3/
> 
> I expect the likes of (but do not know for sure):
> 
> https://pkg.freebsd.org/FreeBSD:15:amd64/base_alpha_1/
> and:
> https://pkg.freebsd.org/FreeBSD:15:armv7/base_beta_3/
> and:
> https://pkg.freebsd.org/FreeBSD:15:powerpc64/base_rc_2/
> and:
> https://pkg.freebsd.org/FreeBSD:15:aarch64/base_release_0/
> 
> None of the like for FreeBSD:15:* have been published yet,
> not even as empty places.
> 
> I expect *.pkg files to have naming conventions that indicate
> the likes of: ALPHA , BETA , and RC with the digit
> indicated as well. There is logic in:
> 
> https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/blame/Makefile.inc1?h=stable%2F15
> 
> from which some of the existing *.pkg naming convention
> structure is derivable. ALPHA, BETA, and RC will get
> .TIMESTAMP in the naming but "snap" is not part of the
> naming as stands.
> 
> I've been told that the *.dtb files will be factored out
> of the kernel *.pkg files so that the various types of
> kernels will not have file conflicts for installation.
> (14 has some *.dtb file conflicts across some kernel
> types.) Note: *.dtb are aarch64 and armv7 files but are
> not arm64 files, for example. So aarch64 and armv7
> will have FreeBSD-dtb*.pkg files.
> 
> > the result is inferior 
> > 15.0-PRERELEASE, for which there is (still) a 
> > `FreeBSD-kernel-generic-nodebug` package, and so on.
> 
> Be warned, FreeBSD-kernel-generic is the name of the NODEBUG
> content kernel for builds built from stable/15 and later
> releng/15.*/ materials. For main that naming is for
> DEBUG content.
> 
> I do not know if there will be FreeBSD-kernel-generic-debug
> package for a DEBUG content based kernel. (Being able to test
> official DEBUG builds without private building of them could
> be handy when problems show up --but such adds to the
> resource use.)
> 
> > Seeking 15 at <https://pkg-status.freebsd.org/builds?type=package> finds 
> > no jail name that begins with 15.
> 
> https://pkg-status.freebsd.org/ is only port-package build
> status. No pkgbase build status before distribution is
> public that I know of.
> 
> The existing https://pkg-status.freebsd.org/ displays do
> not seem to make much sense for pkgbase builds. Such may
> not fit together well if at some point both exist.
> 
> FYI:
> 
> System builds need not involve poudriere or poudriere jails
> or other jails/chroots . https://ci.freebsd.org/ would likely
> be more analogous in some respects. (But, for days,
> I've been seeing "Error 503 Backend fetch failed".)
> 
> > Do we need additional builders, for alphas, betas, and release candidates?
> 
> The resource usage for pkgbase building is not public that
> I know of. None of the port-package builders build pkgbase
> materials (ignoring pkg). Other builders are used.
> 
> > Maybe already work in progress; Colin's hope of "soon" at 
> > <https://www.reddit.com/r/freebsd/comments/1naxy9v/comment/nd1dfui/> 
> > with regard to pkgbase packages shipping on the install images.
> 
> I do not expect that there are resources for most "nice to
> have but not essential" things to get very far during the
> 15.0 release cycle: more like a potential future development
> list will accumulate that will probably take years to get
> through for "nice to have but not essential".
> 
> 
> ===
> Mark Millard
> marklmi at yahoo.com
> 
> 

The rule is simple:
main base_latest
stable/15 becomes base_latest and/or base_weekly
releng/15 will be base_release_X

nothing more.

Best regards,
Bapt