Post AXeiUtlL7xaZP5UGum by tykling@mastodon.social
(DIR) More posts by tykling@mastodon.social
(DIR) Post #AXeiOkoLUobru4xnCi by ms@emacs.ch
2023-07-13T15:28:02Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
can someone ELI5 why #FreeBSD, #OpenBSD, and #NetBSD don't share package manager? I get that they need need different binaries, but why each has their own way to package install?
(DIR) Post #AXeiUtlL7xaZP5UGum by tykling@mastodon.social
2023-07-13T15:29:08Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@ms they are different operating systems, they share very little apart from the name
(DIR) Post #AXeiXzlfFxvoth7F4q by tulpa@fosstodon.org
2023-07-13T15:29:42Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@ms They forked from each other so long ago. Almost everything has diverged since then. They are completely different OSes, unlike the "distros" that Linux has.
(DIR) Post #AXenTYAUQdyzuYQYrI by josephholsten@mstdn.social
2023-07-13T16:24:54Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ms In many ways, the package manager is the real operating system. You can run on different filesystems, with different device drivers, different process schedulers and memory management systems, still call it the same operating system. Even FreeBSD on ARM lacks some of the syscalls that it supports on x86. What makes it FreeBSD is the software in the base system, pkgng & ports.Cf #illumos, where you have different systems with sysv pkg*, solaris ips, netbsd pkgsrc, even debian apt.
(DIR) Post #AXf65SUJnIqeTPvaHg by errante@rot.gives
2023-07-13T19:53:27.219503Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ms @amerika because they have different needsthey are entirely different operating systemsthey all evolved seperately and thus evolved their own package managers and uniting them would have no benefits
(DIR) Post #AXf6AkK2ujWVEXe0oK by errante@rot.gives
2023-07-13T19:54:25.564972Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ms @amerika in particular, their build infrastructure is inherently different for a variety of reasons (freebsd is much more customisable, openbsd is focused on patching shit up a LOT more, idk much about netbsd), they have different syscalls, etc
(DIR) Post #AXf7Hq12FDnIs9hJwm by amerika@noagendasocial.com
2023-07-13T20:06:55Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@errante @ms Good summary. Also: a good topic for new readers to check out, in my view.
(DIR) Post #AXf7jcL6gb22Z4KfJ2 by amerika@noagendasocial.com
2023-07-13T20:11:56Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@errante @ms NetBSD is mysterious. It's like the guy at the party who always has nothing but black tar heroin and Diet Sprite.
(DIR) Post #AXfTBFV3IKbssI08Qq by dcodejams@noc.social
2023-07-14T00:12:10Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ms it's certainly possible - NetBSD's #pkgsrc does work on many other operating systems, including FreeBSD, OpenBSD and Linux.
(DIR) Post #AXg1yJce9XSqI87bl2 by tant@nrw.social
2023-07-14T06:42:03Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ms packages are a sensitive issue. See Linux distros as a reference. :mastolol:
(DIR) Post #AXgVcTzVv0MIhhK5qa by tant@nrw.social
2023-07-14T12:14:16Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@ms second try.First we got FreeBSD ports where you would run make install clean and it did all the downloading, compiling and copying for you.NetBSD forked the ports and named it pksrc.OpenBSD also forked from FreeBSD.The user interface for ports is still just make install clean for all BSDs.pkg_* was added in FreeBSD 2 and again adopted by NetBSD and OpenBSD.FreeBSD 10 then change to pkgng.The major difference here is that FreeBSD supported packages early on.
(DIR) Post #AXgfbdusWw82jqORDE by ms@emacs.ch
2023-07-14T14:06:10Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@tant This is exactly what I wanted to know. I *knew* there needs to be a history behind it :-)Thank you!