Subject: Re: AFS/arla
To: Perry E. Metzger <email@example.com>
From: Jim Wise <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/17/1998 13:31:50
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>The intent is to put the CODA stuff in a separate set, so you need not
>install it. However, having *unavailable* as a base set would seem to
>me to be a bad idea.
I've been thinking about this a lot lately. I wonder if it would be
better in general to break up a lot of the installation sets into
smaller sets which users could pick and choose between.
More interestingly, it seems odd to have a distribution-set format
independent from our packaging format. What if we had the concept of
`system packages' which installed under / and contained chunks of the
standard system install? The `make distribution' target could then
package up the built system into packages which could be pkg_add'ed.
This would also let us use package versioning and dependencies to sort
out a lot of the complex interdependencies between parts of userland and
the kernel, and to make snapshots more formal (and easier!).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----