Re: pkgng suggestion: renaming /usr/sbin/pkg to

On Sep 1, 2012, at 12:40 PM, Matthew Seaman wrote:

> On 01/09/2012 18:43, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
>> In this scenario the ports tree needs to keep support for older =
releases,
>> but that's a consequence of the fact that there's only one ports tree =
for
>> all releases. Somewhere in between the ports and the various releases =
there
>> has to be some form encapsulation, not just for pkg, but for all the =
tools
>> used by the ports tree. Given how the ports tree currently =
encapsulates
>> both the old and new pkg tools I don't see how supporting multiple =
versions
>> of pkgng would be a problem because presumably the difference between =
pkgng
>> versions is going to be much smaller than the difference between the =
old
>> and new tools.
>=20
> New functionality already in the process of development will entail
> making non-backwards compatible changes to the DB schema.  If we're =
tied
> to supporting a version of pkgng bundled with a release, that's going =
to
> make rolling out such changes much harder.  On the other hand, if =
pkgng
> is in ports, then we can release a new version and simultaneously
> publish new package sets (incorporating the update to pkgng) from the
> repositories which will have been built using the updated DB schema.

Will new versions of pkgng support old packages?

Some folks maintain their own package repositories and
will get rather grumpy if an update to pkgng requires them
to rebuild their entire repository.

Tim

_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"