[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: pkg_add and remote packages
Aleksey Cheusov wrote:
That's true and it's an important technical improvement in using
libfetch over a separate ftp(1) process.
JIMHO using external fetching program is MUCH better than
linking with any kind of libraries.
IMHO using library for this kind of tasks is a very serious design BUG.
This is absolutely obvious. Proxies, unusual
protocols for fetching (CIFS/smbclient for example),
p2p networks, etc. etc. etc.
If it's "absolutely obvious", then it's not exactly "IMHO" is it ;-)
I'm willing to see incremental improvements in our package tools over
time. While the current pkg_add(1) does use an external ftp(1) process
to access remote repositories, there is no "pluggable" interface to let
you choose a different binary to use. You can specify one at
compile-time, but the binary must have the exact same interface as
ftp(1). For this reason, I'm okay with using libfetch, which is
essentially just an alternative ftp(1) implementation in a nicer-to-use
I feel this can be revisited down the road after we have made the
changes Joerg has described in his proposal, and possibly have a better
idea of how to standardize the structure for remote repositories. Being
able to use alternative programs, e.g. bittorrent, to grab binary
packages would be something to look forward to in the future, but that
is a feature that is not high priority, whereas the continuing clean-up
and modernization of the pkg_install codebase is definitely a
high-priority project. Making Joerg's proposed changes now will help
make is easier to add new features in the future such as the one you're
-- Johnny C. Lam
Main Index |
Thread Index |