How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos?

Added by M?rcis Lielturks over 3 years ago

Hi!

Want to do some brainstorming here.

I don't know details of how 3rd party software is integrated (and kept up-to-date) on Illumos, but what do you think about creating port system (or integrating NetBSDs "pkgsrc") on Illumos? I have used "pkgsrc" on Solaris 10 and was satisfied with results. I don't picture how hard would it be to create such system or integrate it from NetBSD, but it could expand amount of available software and introduce more decent versions of it.

Depending on feedback, I could try to set up pkg-src on my snv_134 for a start and see how that goes.

Pkgsrc supported OS list
http://www.netbsd.org/docs/software/packages.html#platforms
Some resources for setting up pkgsrc on Solaris 10
http://wtf.hijacked.us/wiki/index.php/Pkgsrc_on_solaris
http://asyd.net/home/docs/solaris/pkgsrc


Replies (29)

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Johan Hedin over 3 years ago

Comparing my experience with the OpenBSD port tree and Gentoo Linux portage system, I must say I'm in favor of the Gentoo one. The upgrades and dependencies are much smoother for the end user (compiling sys adm). Also portage package customization through flags is very neat the Gentoo way.

There is an project of porting the portage system to *BSD.

[[http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gentoo-alt/bsd/index.xml]]

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Luke Crooks over 3 years ago

Personally I would be in favour of the BSD style ports system. USE flags are a great idea for optimisation, but they can also be a headache when updating or installing a new package. Especially when you get a circular dependency, which can be fixed, but then if someone else comes to perform maintenance on the system, it can open up a real can of worms.

If you do try and start trying to integrate a BSD style ports system, drop me a message and ill do what I can to help, if you want help that is.

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Mads Worsøe Duun over 3 years ago

I like the idea of a bsd ports system i illumos. I have worked many years whit bsd, and one thing I really miss in Opensolaris, is a ports system. But start porting something like portage or write a system from scratch, is totally vast of time, when we have NetBSD's pkgsrc, witch already works on Opensolaris. It's even a desirable license for the illumos project, and already has a lot of ported software.

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by M?rcis Lielturks over 3 years ago

I have used FreeBSD, OpenBSD (a bit) and Gentoo port systems and found them quite similar. Regarding the Portage "USE" flags, I refreshed (updated) my knowledge and I think that pkgsrc have very similar functionality available in mk.conf. Besides, pkgsrc was a suggestion because it already is ported to Solaris, and, as Mads wrote, it also works on OpenSolaris.

I think that it's worth trying and I'll try to test pkgsrc on OpenSolaris in my spare time and post some info on how was that.

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Karsten Pedersen over 3 years ago

A FreeSysV ports collection would be very useful to me.

I always found 3rd party repositories such as SFW and BlastWave to be a tad awkward and I felt that the OpenSolaris package system was a disaster.

I read on a mailing list that some people were interested in doing this for open solaris but unfortunately I don't think it ever came to fruition.

http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-help/2006-October/001123.html

Best regards,

Karsten

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Carl Brewer over 3 years ago

I have a few bits and pieces from pkgsrc running on a few OpenSolaris boxes, have been doing so since 200806 or whenever the first release was, most, but noa ll stuff is cheerfully working on b134 too.
I used SunPro, gcc was too much stuffing around to make work.

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by foo bar over 3 years ago

It should already be possible to use Portage on Illumos via Gentoo Prefix. The project page mentions prefix working on Solaris. http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gentoo-alt/prefix/

Gentoo/Illumos would rock :)

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by T.J. Yang over 3 years ago

I like to bring up another package management system candidate for illumos.

TWW HPMS.

See https://www.illumos.org/projects/cpamtww for details.

T.J. Yang

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Mads Worsøe Duun over 3 years ago

Dan Douglas wrote:

It should already be possible to use Portage on Illumos via Gentoo Prefix. The project page mentions prefix working on Solaris. http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gentoo-alt/prefix/

Gentoo/Illumos would rock :)

I know about the Gentoo prefix (Alt project), but I really prefer Pkgsrc for different reasons:

1. Had much more success compiling ports with Pkgsrc
2. Written i C, dose not depend on third party software like python and bash
3. A license that fit Illumos better (BSD) (portage is GPL-2)
4. Simplicity (portage is complex)
5. Well written code (portage is a mess)

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Christopher J. Ruwe over 3 years ago

I run Gentoo on my systems for about 6 years by now. I concur with Mads W. Duun, as

1. portage frequently produces installation issues which are more or less difficult to fix and
3. BSD-licensing is a better fit (not only for Illumos ;-)).

I do not follow on the complexity point (4) though. portage-flags allow for levels of customization to specific build needs (i.e., portage.use, portage.keywords (package stability) and portage.provides ¹, etc.), which are difficult to attain otherwise. So, I would prefer the term feature-rich as a different perspective on complexity.

I cannot comment on 2 and 5 and have no experiences with pkgsrc.
Currently, I am playing with Gentoo prefix and have nothing negative to report.

cheers, Christopher

¹ portage.provides allows for dependency resolving including /usr/local, so software not installed by the package manager is also added to the dependency tree

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Mads Worsøe Duun over 3 years ago

By complex I mean all the configuration files, proiles etc. Pkgsrc's configuration is in mk.conf. I agree that the USE flags is more advanced than pkgsrc's options flag, but the benefit of e.g. performance gains by using these options/use is limited, and then I prefer simplicity.

Projects like pkgcore (http://www.pkgcore.org) was partly made to fix some of the mess of portage. OSUNIX was a project that wanted to use pkgcore on Opensolais, but is stalled now.

If we were gonna use portage, I hope it would be as prefix only. I like the way the BSD's separates the core system from the third party software.

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by devsk devsk over 3 years ago

Mads Worsøe Duun wrote:

By complex I mean all the configuration files, proiles etc. Pkgsrc's configuration is in mk.conf. I agree that the USE flags is more advanced than pkgsrc's options flag, but the benefit of e.g. performance gains by using these options/use is limited, and then I prefer simplicity.

Projects like pkgcore (http://www.pkgcore.org) was partly made to fix some of the mess of portage. OSUNIX was a project that wanted to use pkgcore on Opensolais, but is stalled now.

If we were gonna use portage, I hope it would be as prefix only. I like the way the BSD's separates the core system from the third party software.

Complexity is inversely proportional to familiarity with the system in question. I am very familiar with Portage and I find its one of the easiest pieces of software to work with. Updating the system: snap! Yeah, there are issues once in a while during updates when you haven't updated for months, but nothing that I can't work out in a few minutes. All this just because I am familiar with it and have learnt it well.

I would vote for a build system based on portage, with additional plugins added to handle install as well as create binary IPS packages, and make it work better than portage handles RPM on Linux.

With Nexenta having GNU userland, integrating portage in the system is easier than ever. No need to duplicate stuff in prefix, which I currently use.

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Piotr Jasiukajtis over 3 years ago

Hi,

Regarding portage/pkgcore I have a notes on how to install and bootstrap pkgcore on OpenSolaris based system.
In fact these are used in OSUNIX right now.

If someone is looking to help with pkgcore stuff, please join #osunix on freenode or e-mail me.

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Mads Worsøe Duun over 3 years ago

devsk devsk wrote:

Complexity is inversely proportional to familiarity with the system in question. I am very familiar with Portage and I find its one of the easiest pieces of software to work with. Updating the system: snap! Yeah, there are issues once in a while during updates when you haven't updated for months, but nothing that I can't work out in a few minutes. All this just because I am familiar with it and have learnt it well.

I would vote for a build system based on portage, with additional plugins added to handle install as well as create binary IPS packages, and make it work better than portage handles RPM on Linux.

With Nexenta having GNU userland, integrating portage in the system is easier than ever. No need to duplicate stuff in prefix, which I currently use.

Well, don't get me wrong, I'm not against a portage port. Before I switched to BSD and later OpenSolaris (still use BSD) six years ago, I used Gentoo. I liked Gentoo a lot, but fall totally in love with BSD, from it's very clean and rock solid design, the license, witch I think is much more liberal, the separation between core and third party, and the simple but very efficient ports system. But if most people vote for portage, I will support that, but still prefer a C coded BSD licensed ports system, witch is not depended on a GNU userland and python.

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by foo bar over 3 years ago

There is a very mature (and controversial?) C++ implementation of Gentoo's package manager spec called Paludis. If you care about the cleanliness of the implementation then it is supposedly quite an improvement on the mishmash of Bash and Python that is Portage. Not sure how well it would work for Solaris. http://paludis.pioto.org/

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Jo Ti over 3 years ago

The question at hand is a real valid point to discuss. In my opinion the vast amount of available Packages with Linux or (Free)BSD through package systems that are as well working as easy to use are one of their biggest advantages.

A thing I really liked with the FreeBSD ports system was the choice to either compile the port yourself or get the automatically built binary version from the net.
Generally automated build systems like this or even Ubuntu Launchpad's PPA system or build.opensuse.org (Bottomline: Upload your code plus specfile and get it build and deployed to a readily usable repository for free, for everyone) are probably one of the biggest incentives to get people to provide packages for a system and thus get the system used.
The possibilty to add custom repositories extremely easy (as available with the PPA system, debian repos or Gentoo Overlays) is to be valued a lot too.

The base software of Launchpad as well as the base software or build.opensuse.org are free to be used by other parties, the build.opensuse.org guys explicitly expressed intrest in getting their system usable with other package formats and unixes as well..

Maybe even dpkg might be a viable option, as it already is used with Nexenta.

It wonder if anyone has considered providing such an infrastructure as Launchpad for Illumos/OSol-based Distros?

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Artur Bujdoso over 3 years ago

I think there will be more than one distro based on Illumos. Even if kernel.org as analogy doesn't apply completely Illumos would be mainly a good base to build on.

Personally I like the *BSD port system but also a fan of apt (dpkg) of the Debian derived distros. Each Illumos based distro can decide what package manager or port system is the best for the job. Also there is the Mac OS X approach with MacPorts (BSD-like) and Fink (apt).

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Ivan Nudzik over 3 years ago

Ad. portage vs. pkgsrc:
I've had Gentoo on my notebook for few years - great performance on x86 with the right CFLAGS and LDFLAGS. On servers, I've got one DB server running uptime over 500 days - whole system built with very speculative flags - all mmx + sse optimizations on. Personally I didn't expect such stability. Portage is excellent on Linux.
On xSolaris I've been building with pkgsrc for few years. Some reasons: on SPARC gcc produce slow binaries and pkgsrc is SunStudio friendly; quarterly updates with may be older, but more proven versions of SW; less intrusive for base system layout, better to say not intrusive at all.
My conclusion: pkgsrc fit this case more than portage, on servers for sure. For desktop may be portage should be better, but pkgsrc better separates core of os (Illumos) and additional SW.

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Bernard Tremblay over 3 years ago

I'm working with portage too since few years. I'm now using funtoo, a fork of gentoo by Daniel Robbins (creator of gentoo). I like portage but I can't compare with BSD since I don't know it.

I would try Illumos with portage for sure. I used Solaris years ago and find it's very stable and fast.

Regards,

Bernard :=)

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by foo bar over 3 years ago

Ivan Nudzik wrote:

My conclusion: pkgsrc fit this case more than portage, on servers for sure. For desktop may be portage should be better, but pkgsrc better separates core of os (Illumos) and additional SW.

The vast majority of the maintenance labor goes in to maintaining the packages, not the package manager itself. It takes an army of people to maintain the Gentoo ebuilds, and every new spec requires another dedicated army of developers to maintain the package library. The work involved is far greater than with the binary package genre. This obviously isn't sustainable. Standardization of a source-based package manager format is absolutely critical. We really need to be working towards sharing as much between source-based operating systems as possible rather than re-inventing the wheel.

I would seriously urge those making the decisions to look into the design of existing and historical systems and see where the real benefits and pitfalls lie especially in terms of maintenance. An unmaintainable system is a death sentence no matter how elegantly designed.

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Albert Lee over 3 years ago

Third-party software is not integrated into Illumos, because Illumos is not a distribution. The existing distributions have packaging systems and package maintainers.

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Jonathan Edwards over 3 years ago

Dan Douglas wrote:

The vast majority of the maintenance labor goes in to maintaining the packages, not the package manager itself. It takes an army of people to maintain the Gentoo ebuilds, and every new spec requires another dedicated army of developers to maintain the package library. The work involved is far greater than with the binary package genre. This obviously isn't sustainable. Standardization of a source-based package manager format is absolutely critical. We really need to be working towards sharing as much between source-based operating systems as possible rather than re-inventing the wheel.

+1 on the ebuild front .. all it takes is a couple missteps in a few critical packages (eg: emerge glibc) and you can be majorly SOL

oddly, one of the big complaints is the ability to find reliable binary emerge'd targets .. I say - keep it simple - most of the work has already been done in the major linux distros (yum, apt) and the problems and solutions are generally well understood .. why re-invent the wheel again? Do you really go faster and have less problems when you make whistling hubcaps, spoilers, and glow in the dark chrome - i thought it was more about maintaining the correct [tire] pressure .. :)

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Carlos Sura over 3 years ago

Johan Hedin wrote:

Comparing my experience with the OpenBSD port tree and Gentoo Linux portage system, I must say I'm in favor of the Gentoo one. The upgrades and dependencies are much smoother for the end user (compiling sys adm). Also portage package customization through flags is very neat the Gentoo way.

There is an project of porting the portage system to *BSD.

[[http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gentoo-alt/bsd/index.xml]]

Same here, I'm in favor too, it would be great!

RE: How about BSDlike ports system on Illumos? - Added by Christopher J. Ruwe over 3 years ago

I commented on the idea using a ports-like system, be that NetBSD pkgsrc or Gentoo portage before, countering the idea that Gentoo portage is complicated and expressing, while being undecided, some tilt in favour of Gentoo portage. Also, I stated that I would try to bootstrap both portage as well as pkgsrc and report about that experiment.

I am Gentoo user since about six years and I do not think I am an analphabet regarding to unixes. However, bootstrapping Gentoo prefix on a 64bit Solaris feels like a "two steps ahead, one step back"-ballet. I have started on Friday evening and still I do not have a working portage on my machine. If this is not some peculiarity of my system, but a general state of affairs, then Gentoo portage is not the best choice as a package manager.

So far, I have only read the instructions for bootstrapping pkgsrc, however, a one command bootstrap process scores high when compared to an umpteen step portage bootstrap, which does not work as stated in the docs in addition.

I will post the eventual outcome of my experiment when that time comes ... in about a century, or so ;-)

cheers, Christopher

1 2 Next » (1-25/29)