svn commit: r343118 - in head/usr.sbin: . trim

[Rodney W. Grimes]

> What I think we really need is some way to easily porti-ze useful stuff
> that would otherwise go into /usr/[s]bin, so adding things would be just as
> easy as hooking up SUBDIR into usr.[s]bin/Makefile. Yes, I know, this is
> topic almost as old as the FreeBSD Project itself, but perhaps we just did
> not approach it the right way. It was always the idea that we would just
> move bunch of stuff from src/usr.[s]bin repo into ports/. Which brings
> several important question such as "who is to host the distfile"? "where
> sources hosted", "who is to update the port when changes happen?" etc.
> 
> Perhaps even by forking the whole ports idea into a smaller closely-guarged
> subset. Something like a new baseports repository, which might have
> structure like baseports/usr.bin/xxx, baseports/usr.sbin/yyy etc. Then add
> some automagic glue to kick in on every commit and transfer this into valid
> ports, which is going to be packaged by the poudriere and such. This way we
> could reduce amount of port-foo average src committer needs in order to
> maintain code. I am almost tempted to sit and write something over the next
> weekend or few of thereofs. Using usr.sbin/trim as an example.

Couldnt the "distribution" just live as files commited into
the ports tree as a "work" hierarcy and the top level file
be marked as no fetch.  We use to stick small stuff in ports
by putting there files in files/ and having that work IIRC.

I really really dislike the idea of putting stuff from base in
external repositories and then fetching them, something just
feels fundementally wrong about that.

> -Max
> 
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 12:47 PM Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert at cschubert.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > In message <CAG6CVpX78rHMtWTm97We50qy_D2jX79upn-9TjMy90cZeyVecQ at mail.gma
> > il.com>
> > , Conrad Meyer writes:
> > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 12:22 PM Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert at cschubert.com>
> > wrot
> > > e:
> > > > This is wrong. IIRC there was discussion that this should be in dd(1).
> > > > Why not submit a revision to add the functionality to dd?
> > >
> > > Well, it's wrong, but not because we need another weird dd mode.  dd
> > > is hard enough to use already.
> >
> > I've never found dd confusing. What's wrong conv=erase?
> >
> > If it must stay, sderase is a better name. That's really what it does.
> >
> > Ports maybe?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> > Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert at cschubert.com>
> > FreeBSD UNIX:  <cy at FreeBSD.org>   Web:  http://www.FreeBSD.org
> >
> >         The need of the many outweighs the greed of the few.
> >
> >
> >
> >

-- 
Rod Grimes                                                 rgrimes at freebsd.org