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

On Thursday, August 30, 2012 10:39:17 am Tijl Coosemans wrote:
> On 27-08-2012 18:24, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Sunday, August 26, 2012 4:37:53 pm Doug Barton wrote:
> >> The problem is that we don't really support the idea of things in the
> >> base magically deleting themselves.
> >>
> >> As I have said in previous messages, the bootstrapping problem is being
> >> overblown by several orders of magnitude. For newly installed systems
> >> where pkg is the default, /usr/local/bin/pkg will be installed. So there
> >> is no bootstrapping problem.
> >>
> >> For already-installed systems who wish to switch to pkg, they can
> >> install from /usr/ports, or use the pkg bootstrap tool in the base.
> >> Given that they will be intentionally making this change, and there will
> >> be instructions written up on how to do this which include the
> >> bootstrapping step, once again this is a non-issue.
> >>
> >> The whole idea of having every call to /usr/local/sbin/pkg pass through
> >> /usr/sbin/pkg in order to help a tiny minority of users with a one-time
> >> bootstrapping issue is just plain ludicrous.
> > 
> > I agree.  Even if we keep /usr/sbin/pkg, we will presumably want to remove
> > it from the base in a year or so via 'make delete-old', etc.  Given that,
> > I'm not sure we need it there in the first place.
> 
> What if you pkg_delete \* or rm -rf /usr/local? Do you have to "reboot"
> pkg then?

Yes, if we've decided it (pkgng) should not be part of the base.  This
doesn't strike me as that weird.  It seems similar to how one has to
bootstrap, say, MacPorts.  I think having pkgng self-contained is a 
feature, and that having /usr/sbin/pkg is of limited usefulness and is
open to being stale.

-- 
John Baldwin