[CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8)

[Matthew Seaman]

On 03/14/16 22:00, René Ladan wrote:
> This leads to the more general
> question if/how packages from the Ports Tree should indicate a
> dependency on base packages. Something like
> "LIB_DEPENDS=libjail.so:base/libjail" ? (and yes, currently all base
> packages have "base" as a single common origin...)

How is the ports supposed to fulfil this dependency if it is found to be
missing?  You'ld either have to fail on a missing base package or rely
on pkg(8) to install it -- the latter seems pretty reasonable, but that
behaviour is quite an important change to the ports overall behaviour.
It gets even more complicated if you need to depend on specific versions
of a base package. I think having an attempt to install a port result in
triggering an update to a new version of the base system would probably
not go down too well.

It's an interesting question though.  If we're going to record explicit
dependencies against the base system in packages, we'd absolutely need
the whole variable version number dependency thing that was discussed
earlier.  You wouldn't want to be forced to recompile / reinstall
everything binary if there's any update to the package containing libc,
and that shouldn't be necessary in any case due to the forwards
compatibility guarantee on libc's ABI.

	Cheers,

	Matthew


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-pkgbase/attachments/20160315/c10f6d32/attachment.sig>