[FreeBSD-Ports-Announce] Time to bid farewell to the old pkg_ tools

Matthias Andree matthias.andree at gmx.de
Wed Feb 5 22:53:00 UTC 2014

Am 05.02.2014 23:02, schrieb Julian H. Stacey:
> Matthew Seaman wrote:
>> On 03/02/2014 21:24, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
>>>> be beneficial in a very short amount of time.  Even if you prefer to
>>>> compile from source,
>>> =20
>>> I use source, rarely if ever use packages, (except pkg_delete
>>> to remove old broken dependencies). No opinion which scrips are better.=
>>> =20
>>> =20
>>>> you will still reap the benefits of the modern
>>>> packaging system.
>>> =20
>>> In 10.0 FreeBSD `reaped the benefit` of a default new horrible
>>> registry that smells like Microsoft with quasi binary local.sqlite
>>> needing special tools.  (Yes I know there's an export function.)
>>> =20
>>> For 2 decade we've poured scorn on Microsoft & its opaque easily
>>> damaged hard to access registry, & lauded how with FreeBSD we can
>>> examine & manipulate & repair our text based equivalent with any
>>> number of personal choice text tools, & now FreeSBD is burdened by
>>> this horrible Microsoft style registry.
>> You're being absurd.
> Immediately personal criticism is a poor way to start convincing.
> ports/ is not just for package addicts.  I never install packages,
> but only build & install from ports/.  sqlite junk obstructs
> /var/db/pkg being accessed by find & grep to debug breaking ports builds.

While I have wanted a few of the pkg options to be 100% compatible with
the pkg_info options, I never felt the need to dig around in the package
system innards other than to debug goofups that originated in the
package system itself.  Especially not to debug breaking port builds.
portmaster has made things quite easy when dealing with source builds.

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list