On 8/30/07, Matt Fleming <mjf@netbsd.org> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> [Just for the record I'm in favour of this general idea]
>
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 10:51:22AM +0200, Adam Hamsik wrote:
> > Cons:
> > 1) we strongly integrate pkgsrc and netbsd I think that keep them more
> > separate is better for portability and also for netbsd users(because they
> > don't need to use pkgsrc if they want to upgrade their system).
> > 2)What about other supported operating systems mostly Dfbsd,Solaris?
> >
>
> I'm not sure why netbsd source being strongly integrated with pkgsrc
> would be a problem, I mean, the source is strongly dependent upon
> build.sh code now.
>
> The idea of being able to install a prebuilt kernel via pkg_add seems
> really cool to me, epsecially if that machine is just tracking security
> criticial updates, etc.
>


I probably should have been more clear in my original message about
this point.  I don't think netbsd's src should be tracked by or tied
to pkgsrc in any way; nor do I feel that someone using pkgsrc should
automatically get the netbsd source tree.  I would imagine the
checkout would be to a separate directory.  (kind of like pkgsrc/wip,
but probably even less tied-together)  I was attempting to make this
point when I talked about keeping the pkgsrc bootstrap separate from
the entire build.sh tools, but I obviously failed on that.  :)

And yes, I agree that tracking security updates would be a major
advantage for this type of system.

I also like the idea of non-netbsd pkgsrc targets being able to
download and build arbitrary parts of netbsd.  (people seem to like it
-- see gentoo/netbsd and debian/netbsd)