svn & new pkg system
fbsd8 at a1poweruser.com
Sun Mar 10 17:18:09 UTC 2013
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On 2013-03-09 22:04, Robert Huff <roberthuff at rcn.com> wrote:
>> Giorgos Keramidas writes:
>>> > Is svn going to become part of the base system in 9.2-RELEASE?
>> [good reasons for not including subversion ellided]
>> On the other hand ...
>> The traditional - and I believe still canonical - way of updating the
>> system is to recompile from source.
>> I know I am not alone in feeling the system is substantially
>> incomplete if it does not come with all the tools necessary to do
>> (Not slighting freebsd-update (don't know enough about it to have an
>> opinion); just pointing out it has limitations.)
> This has been traditionally true with CVS, which was also a complex
> piece of software, but still merged periodically into FreeBSD src.
> I think it's always a small annoyance when things break away from
> 'tradition', but on the other hand tradition shouldn't be able to put
> a stop to moving along or act as an impediment for doing our 'real'
> work. And the real work of the team is to develop FreeBSD, not to
> develop a version control system. There's a lot of know-how and
> development happening in the main Subversion development process;
> a lof of experience that we do not necessarily need to duplicate
> in our own team to do what we like best: that is, develop FreeBSD.
> It's understandable that having to install a package to check-out
> the sources is a diversion from previous practice, and it may be
> somewhat annoying -- like every change is annoying at first. But
> the package is not going to go away and it won't stop working, at
> least as long as we are using it ourselves to develop the system.
> So other than the difference that now the sources of the VCS used
> for development are not part of src/, conceptually there isn't a
> lot of difference from before. The previous state of things was:
> FreeBSD developers use CVS to check out the sources, and
> develop the system itself. CVS is available [as part of the
> base system] to everyone else who wants to grab a copy of
> the source tree.
> WHat happens now is quite similar, except for the bracketed text:
> FreeBSD developers use SVN to check out the sources, and
> develop the system itself. SVN is available [as part of the
> official packages] to everyone else who wants to grab a copy of
> the source tree.
Your thinking is way to narrow. Besides source, svn can also grab a copy
to the ports tree or just a single port. This a much quicker and a more
flexible approach than using portsnap.
No body has made a case for NOT including svn in the base system. If it
can be a port there is no reason why it can not be included in the base
Just because developers us it is no reason to make life difficult of
those who are not devolopers and have other uses for it.
More information about the freebsd-questions