Subject: Re: PROPOSAL: NetBSD System Packages (LONG)
To: Jonathan Stone <jonathan@DSG.Stanford.EDU>
From: Hubert Feyrer <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 10/01/1998 09:07:12
On Wed, 30 Sep 1998, Jonathan Stone wrote:
> I think we've gotten close to agreement (or is it resignation?)
> on pkgsets.

The latter, definitely, ...

> Hubert: suppose we make pkgsets strict supersets of pkgs.  Maybe we
> add a +RECURSE file as second entry, or even instead of a +CONTENTS.
> (I'm not committed to particular details.)

What you are requesting here was in pkg_* all the time, that's exactly
what the @pkgdep dependencies are for.

What I see, all you want to contain a "pkg set" is to have a
PLIST/+CONTENTS file w/ some @pkgdep lines in it. 
(BTW, if you really want to stuff in information like sizes (ewww,
static!), then you can encode this kind of information in some commend,
like the MD5 checksums; but be aware that pkg_add won't be able to honour
this then out of the box).

> What do you think of revamping the "normal" pkg_* tools so that they
> grok the pkgset format, and invoke themselves recursively on each
> element of the pkgsets' contents, as either a pkg or another pkgset?
> Maybe ignoring files that're "tape-recorded sysinst options"?

Install dependencies of a pkg unless it's suppressed via some command
line/pkg options? Shouldn't be too hard (while I don't understand why you
would want to specify this in the pkg).

 - Hubert

P.S.: Jonathan, please fix your MUA's To: field setting, it always adds

Hubert Feyrer <>