On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 07:28:41AM -0700, John Nemeth wrote:
> } Variant 2b (still for "custom" builds):
> } Before running build.sh, the user also gets a pkgsrc tree and sets the
> } MKPKGSRC option (or whatever) similiar to MKX11. The bootstrap is
> } cross-compiled as part of the release build.
> 
>      I assume this goes for official release builds as well.  I don't
> know what releng will think of this idea.  The problems that I see are
> having to have a pkgsrc checkout available and how to ensure that
> release builds are reproducable.

Given that the pkgsrc checkout can be shared between the releases, it
shouldn't be too bad. Reproducablity is somewhat ensured by using a
pkgsrc branch. We have to be a bit more careful about when to alter
versions in pkgsrc and when not, but that should be managable.

> Of course, with heading towards
> removing X from base and switching to modular X.org from pkgsrc, these
> problems will need resolving anyways.

Yes, exactly my thought. The problems are very similiar.

> The remaining question is what
> about syspkgs should they ever come to fruition.  Would these require
> the same thing, or would they require their own tools which would come
> with base?

I don't know. One thought on this is that syspkgs can be created from
the sets and/or the populated DESTDIR. This would mean a native
pkg_create. I don't think it is too difficult to get that out of pkgsrc
either, esp now that pkg_create is a stand-alone program without
external dependencies in terms of exec. So if it is acceptable that the
pkgsrc dependency is required for syspkg as well, that wouldn't create a
problem. One thing to keep in mind is that the arguments for pkg_create
might change over time, so it would imply that some more backwards
compatibility has to kept. This is not an issue at the moment, but might
be in the future.

Joerg