Growing list of required(ish) ports
kpaasial at gmail.com
Mon Apr 8 03:34:35 UTC 2013
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 6:19 AM, Robert Simmons <rsimmons0 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Bryan Drewery <bdrewery at freebsd.org> wrote:
>> On 4/7/2013 8:47 PM, Robert Simmons wrote:
>>> Are there plans to get the following ports moved into HEAD?
>>> 1) ports-mgmt/pkg
>>> 2) ports-mgmt/dialog4ports
>>> 3) ports-mgmt/portaudit
>>> 4) ports-mgmt/portmaster
>>> It seems to me like these belong in the base system.
>> On the contrary, the idea is that more and more should come *out of
>> base* and into ports. Base is very static and stuck in time. By moving
>> these things into ports, you are able to get updates much simpler. No
>> need for an errata or security advisory or release. Just updating with
>> portmaster/pkg upgrade.
> I understand where you're coming from, but perhaps there needs to be
> movement in both directions.
> I may be way off the mark here, but I'd love to spark a discussion
> about this. I think that in general things that are directly FreeBSD
> projects belong in base. Examples would be pkgng, and making
> dialog4ports a switch in dialog(1). Essentially, code that does not
> have an upstream should be in base.
> On the other hand, there are a number of things that I think should be
> pulled out of base. Some already have ports, and others would need
> ports created. Examples of things to pull out of base are OpenSSL,
> Heimdal, OpenSSH, PF, ntpd, ipfilter, bind, sendmail, and others.
> Code that is typically way behind the upstream project basically.
>> portaudit is not needed with pkg, just use 'pkg audit'.
> I had missed that. Thanks!
>>> Also, is there a reason why dialog4ports's functionality wasn't added
>>> to dialog(1) as a switch?
>> Bryan Drewery
>> bdrewery at freenode/EFNet
I think Bryan already explained the reasons why pkg should not be in
base, it's an external tool that is not stricly required to get a bare
bones FreeBSD system up and running. Including it in base you create
yet another maintainance burden and would slow down the development of
the ports/packages management tools.
More information about the freebsd-ports