On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 10:52:43AM -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 7:09 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
> >
> > On Aug 21, 2012, at 7:58 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Doug Barton wrote:
> >>
> >>> I don't think we have ever done a complete replacement of majo
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 7:09 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> On Aug 21, 2012, at 7:58 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Doug Barton wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think we have ever done a complete replacement of major
>>> infrastructure in one release.
>>
>> You mean like sysinstall can be us
On Aug 21, 2012, at 7:58 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Doug Barton wrote:
>
>> I don't think we have ever done a complete replacement of major
>> infrastructure in one release.
>
> You mean like sysinstall can be used as an installer on 9 that would
> do something meaningful
On 8/21/2012 6:58 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Doug Barton wrote:
>
>> I don't think we have ever done a complete replacement of major
>> infrastructure in one release.
>
> You mean like sysinstall can be used as an installer on 9 that would
> do something meaningful with the
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 02:43:13PM -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote:
>
> What Doug mentioned (and I don't think was really considered, but
> is valid) would break people that use pkg_* outside of ports. I know
> of at least two instances where this would be the case (one case that
> uses pkg_* dire
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Doug Barton wrote:
I don't think we have ever done a complete replacement of major
infrastructure in one release.
You mean like sysinstall can be used as an installer on 9 that would
do something meaningful with the current infrastructure we provide?
--
Bjoern A. Zeeb
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 8/21/2012 1:08 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 21, 2012, at 1:51 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/21/2012 12:42 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:38:04PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 8/21/2012 12:05 PM
On 8/21/2012 1:08 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> On Aug 21, 2012, at 1:51 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
>
>> On 8/21/2012 12:42 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:38:04PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
On 8/21/2012 12:05 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> 1/ if it fits the schedul
On Aug 21, 2012, at 1:51 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 8/21/2012 12:42 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:38:04PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
>>> On 8/21/2012 12:05 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
1/ if it fits the schedule: get rid of pkg_* tools in current
to be abl
On 8/21/2012 12:42 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:38:04PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
>> On 8/21/2012 12:05 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>>> 1/ if it fits the schedule: get rid of pkg_* tools in current
>>> to be able to have a fully pkgng only 10-RELEASE
>>
>> I think i
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:38:04PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 8/21/2012 12:05 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > 1/ if it fits the schedule: get rid of pkg_* tools in current to be
> > able to have a fully pkgng only 10-RELEASE
>
> I think it would fit better with historic precedents to make pk
On 8/21/2012 12:05 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> 1/ if it fits the schedule: get rid of pkg_* tools in current to be
> able to have a fully pkgng only 10-RELEASE
I think it would fit better with historic precedents to make pkg
optional (but default on) in 10, and mandatory in 11. As stated
befor
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:47:36AM -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
> > On 8/21/2012 6:46 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> >> I would also like to just remove pkg_* tools from RELENG_10 if that fits
> >> the
> >> schedule.
> >
> > Um, no?
>
> ...
On 8/21/2012 11:47 AM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
>> On 8/21/2012 6:46 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>>> I would also like to just remove pkg_* tools from RELENG_10 if that fits the
>>> schedule.
>>
>> Um, no?
>
> ...
>
>> What _would_ be useful
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 8/21/2012 6:46 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>> I would also like to just remove pkg_* tools from RELENG_10 if that fits the
>> schedule.
>
> Um, no?
...
> What _would_ be useful is what should have been done many years ago when
> it was
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:17:36AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 8/21/2012 6:46 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > I would also like to just remove pkg_* tools from RELENG_10 if that fits the
> > schedule.
>
> Um, no?
>
> Until pkg becomes mandatory (which can't happen for several years) the
> pk
On 8/21/2012 6:46 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> I would also like to just remove pkg_* tools from RELENG_10 if that fits the
> schedule.
Um, no?
Until pkg becomes mandatory (which can't happen for several years) the
pkg_* tools can't be removed altogether.
What _would_ be useful is what should
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Kimmo Paasiala wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Lawrence Stewart
> wrote:
>> On 08/21/12 17:04, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 07:05:49AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
On 21/08/2012 00:21, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Tue
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Lawrence Stewart wrote:
> On 08/21/12 17:04, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 07:05:49AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
>>> On 21/08/2012 00:21, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:09:46AM +0300, Vitaly Magerya wrote:
> B
On 08/21/12 17:04, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 07:05:49AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
>> On 21/08/2012 00:21, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:09:46AM +0300, Vitaly Magerya wrote:
Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> Please [...] ask question about
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 03:26:43PM +0200, Jeremie Le Hen wrote:
> Hi Baptise,
>
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 09:43:13PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> >
> > Since 1.0-rc6 release, everything looks ready for a final release of 1.0,
> > I'll
> > give more details on the release commit bit :) this
Hi Baptise,
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 09:43:13PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>
> Since 1.0-rc6 release, everything looks ready for a final release of 1.0, I'll
> give more details on the release commit bit :) this is planned for 30th august
> 2012.
>
> Current was supposed to switch to pkgng
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:37:26PM +0200, Olivier Smedts wrote:
> 2012/8/21 Baptiste Daroussin :
> > On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:09:46AM +0300, Vitaly Magerya wrote:
> >> What would be the best practice of mixing ports with packages?
> >
> > There is no best practice for that unfortunatly, (as actua
On 21 August 2012 11:37, Olivier Smedts wrote:
> 2012/8/21 Baptiste Daroussin :
>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:09:46AM +0300, Vitaly Magerya wrote:
>>> What would be the best practice of mixing ports with packages?
>>
>> There is no best practice for that unfortunatly, (as actually) the best for
>
2012/8/21 Baptiste Daroussin :
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:09:46AM +0300, Vitaly Magerya wrote:
>> What would be the best practice of mixing ports with packages?
>
> There is no best practice for that unfortunatly, (as actually) the best for
> you
> is maybe to build your own pkgng repostories?
>
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 07:05:49AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 21/08/2012 00:21, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:09:46AM +0300, Vitaly Magerya wrote:
> >> Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> >>> Please [...] ask question about pkgng [...]
> >>
> >> What would be the best pra
On 21/08/2012 00:21, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:09:46AM +0300, Vitaly Magerya wrote:
>> Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>>> Please [...] ask question about pkgng [...]
>>
>> What would be the best practice of mixing ports with packages?
>>
>> The use case I have in mind is co
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:09:46AM +0300, Vitaly Magerya wrote:
> Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > Please [...] ask question about pkgng [...]
>
> What would be the best practice of mixing ports with packages?
>
> The use case I have in mind is compiling Xorg ports locally
> WITH_NEW_XORG and WITH_
Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> Please [...] ask question about pkgng [...]
What would be the best practice of mixing ports with packages?
The use case I have in mind is compiling Xorg ports locally
WITH_NEW_XORG and WITH_KMS, and using packages from
pkgbeta.freebsd.org for everything else. Is there
Hi all,
Since 1.0-rc6 release, everything looks ready for a final release of 1.0, I'll
give more details on the release commit bit :) this is planned for 30th august
2012.
Current was supposed to switch to pkgng by default today, it has been delayed
until the nvidia-driver is fixed with pkgng. Th
30 matches
Mail list logo
