Subject: Re: Proposal: unification of distfiles for FreeBSD and NetBSD
To: NetBSD Packages Technical Discussion List <tech-pkg@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Michal Pasternak <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 10/01/2003 16:58:04
Greg A. Woods [Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 05:11:40PM -0400]:
> This only matters if you're _really_ tight on space and can't afford to
> have multiple copies of the same file in different subdirectories.
> But if your systems are that tight on space then you probably won't be
> creating a local distfiles mirror in the first place and instead will be
> always fetching distfiles from their original locations.
> I've used the same local distfiles archive for both NetBSD and FreeBSD
> for several years now and have never enountered any problems whatsoever.


I have always seen *BSD family as operating systems, that have everything
optimized. It's Linux kernel developers, who said "well, RAM is cheap, let's
not optimize our VM" - 2.4.x series kernels. Of course, that what you say is
right - tetrabyte-sized mirrors don't care about such things. But
personally, for me: even if the file takes 20 KB, I *don't* want to have
somedistfile-1.0.0.tar.gz and somedistfile-1.0.0.tar.bz2, I don't want to
download the same sources (only in different format) twice. And I think,
that if the change makes pkgsrc even a bit better, it is worth mentioning,
discussing and/or finally importing to pkgsrc system.

I'll continue my research on "pkgsrc vs ports" anyway. Pkgsrc *is* superior,
but catching up with other projects is also important.

I'd suggest using .tar.bz2 sources when they are available for newly created
packages, I'd suggest mentioning it in some documentation - both for pkgsrc
and ports. So much for now.

Michal Pasternak ::
Resistance isn't futile, it's voltage divided by amperage