[ECFT] pkgng 0.1-alpha1: a replacement for pkg_install

[Julien Laffaye]

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Ivan Voras <ivoras at freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 25/03/2011 11:11, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>
>>  In term of technology we decided to use a sqlite3 database, and to
>>  prevent potential trolling, sqlite3 is used in it's amalgamation form
>>  which means it is incorporated in the code sources (as recommanded by
>>  sqlite developpers like a statically linked library) on build we only
>>  activate the features we need in sqlite.
>
> I'm very glad you went with sqlite3! I've looked at pkgng source a bit and
> it looks like you use transactions and foreign keys which is a huge benefit
> for the whole effort.
>
> At this time I'd just like to suggest you add the use of WAL journal
> (http://www.sqlite.org/pragma.html#pragma_journal_mode) on database creation
> so you get the benefits of multiple-readers-single-writer concurrency model.
>

It sounds like a good idea. I'll add WAL support and if no problem
arise from that we should keep it.

>>  The alpha release come with an experimental tool "pkg2ng" to convert
>>  an existing package database to the new pkgng database format. So one
>>  can test pkgng without rebuild all its packages.
>
> Could you change the filename of the database to have the ".sqlite"
> extension? It's not important but it indicates what it is used by and newer
> software is moving to ".sqlite".
>

Sure. Maybe rename pkg.db to local.sqlite so it will consistent with
the repo.sqlite (both in /var/db/pkg)

>>  One of the thing we are thinking about pkgng is to perhaps be able to
>>  provide it only as a ports (with simple script in base to
>>  boostrap/install it). That would allow pkgng to live with the ports to
>>  be able to easily integrate new features without having to support
>>  very old version of pkgng.
>
> Maybe I'm misunderstanding but won't that mean that the ports system without
> pkgng will continue to maintain their data in the current format?
>
If pkgng is not installed, the first thing the port system will do is
to install it.

>>  more informations can be found here:
>>  http://git.etoilebsd.net/pkgng/tree/docs/GOALS,
>
> """
>          the database will be a sqlite file compressed with the xz format.
>          the database will be signed so we can trust the sha256 of the
>          packages, so if a package has the expected hash, it is considered
>          trusted.
> """
>
> I'm not sure on what "the database" refers at this point, but is it really
> necessary to compress it? I don't mean it's hard to do, just that maybe it
> would be simpler without it.

It is the database describing the remote repository. It is interesting
to compress it because it will be downloaded.

>
> About this signature: hashing like this is very rudimentary. Could you
> design this to extensible, expecting real PGP-based signatures in the
> future?

We thought that signing the repo.sqlite file would be simpler.
If we want to sign each package individually, we must have a tarball
which contains the real tarball plus the signature.

Regards,
Julien