FreeBSD hacker 101

Mike Meyer mwm-keyword-freebsdhackers2.e313df at mired.org
Sun Jan 27 10:33:46 PST 2008


On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 15:55:53 -0800 (PST) KAYVEN  RIESE <kayve at sfsu.edu> wrote:

> 
> 
> On Sat, 26 Jan 2008, Mike Meyer wrote:
> > On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 12:24:36 -0800 (PST) KAYVEN  RIESE <kayve at sfsu.edu> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 26 Jan 2008, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> >>> KAYVEN  RIESE <kayve at sfsu.edu> writes:
> > .rpm is a package format, and comes with a tool set for using it. Most
> > (all?) GNU/Linux systems come with tools for dealing with it, but they
> > all also come with tools for dealing with .tgz. Some GNU/Linux distros
> > use .rpm to distribute their software, but not all do. I don't think
> > any Unix systems have adopted it; most of them have packaging systems
> > that predate .rpm, and they're all different. Different package
> > formats for vendor software isn't a GNU/Linux vs. FreeBSD or Unix
> > thing, it's a fact of line in a multi-platform Unix environment.
> my reason for bringing the whole thing up was based on the idea
> that this person might be used to using *.rpm all the time

Well, maybe. But consider the context: they're looking at moving from
GNU/Linux to FreeBSD, so they're probably familiar with more than one
GNU/Linux distro, so there's a good chance they'ev seen more than just
rpms for system software distribution. Further, they're looking at
working on the FreeBSD code base, so they're a programmer, so there's
a good chance they've gone to the source sites for the packages
included in those distros, where they almost certainly would have
noticed that the binaries for other platforms weren't in rpms. Since
they're programmers, they've probably downloaded source distributions,
which are almost invariable tarballs of some sort or another.

In other words, the chances that they've only seen rpm file
distributions would seem to be vanishingly small, so there are things
that are far more likely to disrupt them - like the difference in
which system calls will work properly between fork() and exec() that
Posix() doesn't require to do so - that are still so unlikely to do so
to be worth mentioning in this context.

If you feel you have to mention it, then you should really talk about
the tools, not the formats: GNU/Linux distros tend to use rpm* or apt*
tools for installing and managing software packages, whereas FreeBSD
uses the pkg* tools.

> and this
> would be a difference he would experience moving to 
freeBSD, if
> this was the case.  if this is not the case for him, as you seem
> to be implying, then.. well.. still.. he must know to avoid
> *.rpm distributions in any case unless he installs a *.rpm compatibility
> tool.  is that part of the linux-compat stuff that freeBSD has?

Just out of curiosity, where do you expect to find software for
FreeBSD in an rpm format? I don't think they exist, so *avoiding* them
wont' be a problem. Possibly wasting time looking for them might be,
but again, that seems really unlikely given the context, so there are
more important things to suggest they not waste time on, like
wandering how they upgrade just part of the base system.

     <mike
-- 
Mike Meyer <mwm at mired.org>		http://www.mired.org/consulting.html
Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.


More information about the freebsd-hackers mailing list