Subject: Re: is syspkg alive?
To: None <tech-userlevel@NetBSD.org>
From: David Young <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 07/06/2007 18:53:02
On Sat, Jul 07, 2007 at 12:40:56AM +0300, Aleksey Cheusov wrote:
> IMHO NetBSD base system contains lots of rarely used things.
> It can be much smaller and some things can be easily moved to pkgsrc
> (even if they are developped and maintained in NetBSD CVS tree).
> I repeat my question I asked previously:
> is there *FORMAL CRITERIA* to include things into base system?
> - tools necessary for building whole system
> - tools necessary for setting up network
> - tools useful for developing NetBSD itself
> - at least one NetBSD developer wants it
> - POSIX/SUS/... require it
> - intuition ;-)
> - ?
With a small change of build.sh options, I can cross-build every program
in the NetBSD base system for every architecture that NetBSD targets.
That is a useful guarantee that our base system provides. If programs
in the base system, today, are only in pkgsrc, tomorrow, then I may lose
the guaranteed ability to quickly and easily cross-build a useful NetBSD
network appliance. Does that help explain why I prefer a comprehensive
When speaking about programs that deserve to be in the base system,
something else to consider is that some software can be usefully run on
an embedded computer, or a 10 year-old computer, but I would quickly lose
patience waiting for that same software to build on the target computer.
Just for example, I run a lot more software on a Soekris net4526 embedded
computer than I would ever think to build on the net4526. No, I prefer
to build software for the Soekris using my 2.4 GHz P4, or an even faster
computer. Likewise, I would never build X11 on my 300 MHz UltraSparc 5,
but I would run X11 on that machine. Gnome or KDE, on the other hand,
I would neiter compile nor run on any of my old/embedded and slow boxes.
David Young OJC Technologies
email@example.com Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933 ext 24