Fwd: WWW Feedback from ross%goal.co.za@localhost: Porting pkgtools to a new OS

["Ross Cameron" <ross%goal.co.za@localhost>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ross Cameron <ross%goal.co.za@localhost>
Date: Nov 3, 2006 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: WWW Feedback from ross%goal.co.za@localhost: Porting pkgtools to a new OS
To: www%netbsd.org@localhost

Hi there Jeremy,.... hope this email finds you well!

I've managed to get pkgsrc to bootstrap using a GGC stack that I've put together with my package management system.
Thereafter everything works as expected on a Linux system,....

IE: Host package manager manages a minimal set of packages and pkgsrc/pkgtools admins the rest.
      Whilst this is pretty cool I would like to run a pure pkgsrc/pkgtools system.

What I want to do though is COMPLETELY replace my package manager with pkgsrc.

From first bootup it must use nothing else but pkgsrc and the NetBSD pkgtools.

Would it be possible to get a DETAILED technical specification of how a binary package is structured so I can migrate away from my package manager at OS compile time.

Also how do the NetBSD sets work in you're installer system?

I'd like to base my installer on the NetBSD installer, cause why re-invent the wheel when you're system works so well?

I would also like to be able to manage the WHOLE OS from pkgsrc.... my thinking is as follows:

• There are a thousand mini-UNIXes out there without any one project being a central point of guidance.
• I would like to be able to build a generic "Minimal UNIX" toolkit where the user chooses a kernel they like (whether that be a Linux/NetBSD/OpenBSD/FreeBSD kernel) and the rest bootstraps out of the most recent STABLE pkgsrc.
• Would we be able to create a new sub-category in PKGSRC called something like "miniunix"?

And put my "base-system" and various kernel packages in there?

• Would it be possible to add a "flavour" to the glibc package in pkgsrc that is more alligned with a minimalistic OS???????

IE:    My current binary package is 4.4MB and provides everything for a router system/vpn device.

• Most of the packages can be build in standard pkgsrc style,.... the only ones missing are:
• basesystem-linux-<version>            (My uber minimal base system image.)
  
• kernel-linux-<version>                      (My Linux kernel and associated modules.)
  
• iptables-<version>
• busybox-<version>                            (Micro command set for mini UNIX systems.)
• e3-<version>                                      (Micro text editor that emulates vi/emacs/pico/joe etc.)
• dhcpcd-<version>                              (The dhcp client I use,... not cast in stone can be altered.)
  

• basesystem-netbsd-<version>
• kernel-netbsd-<version>                   (etc. etc. for OpenBSD and FreeBSD kernels)

My reasoning for wanting to start a project like this is two fold:

1.          I work in the embedded systems industry and NOTHING gets my goat as much as the imcompatibilities in user interface and programming interface across the embedded systems!

I cant be the only one to find this a TOTAL waste of time, money and effort,... if someone steps up to the plate and provides a cross architecture/cross kernel build system it can only help stabilise things.

The reason normal Linux systems are proliferating is that there is a stabilising factor in the two main camps of RPM based and APT based distros.

It allows developers to collaborate more freely in a more common invironment. (Even though they HATE each other!)

2.         I am a HUGE fan of NetBSD but unfortunately the providers of our hardware cryptography accelerators only have drivers for the Linux kernel at the moment and have expressed no intention of porting them to any other kernels.

I get provided with binary kernel objects and the source code is 100% not available under any circumstances.

And I would like to keep the system as close to NetBSD as possible from a package management and administration perspective cause I find that it is the most logical and orderly package manager out there.

How feasible is this do you think?
I dont mind doing a lot (if not all of the development work) in the begining till its functional and working properly,... I just need some guidance and assistance on the pkgsrc/pkgtools side.
          Also how likely is it that I could get those packages accepted into the upstream pkgsrc system? I would hate to have to fork and continually patch a derivative pkgsrc instance if that can at all be avoided.

Regards,...
Ross Cameron

On 10/19/06, Jeremy C. Reed < reed%netbsd.org@localhost> wrote:

Hello Ross,

Thank you for your feedback.

If your system provides standard Linux with glibc and coreutils (and
related), pkgsrc should probably work for you as is. Even if you use a
custom libc and userland, I'd expect it to work fine for you.

pkgsrc provides a "bootstrap" script to help get the prerequisite tools
installed.

Also for doing package builds, pkgsrc does a great job at detecting the
system and tools and libraries available.

I'd be interested in helping you a little with testing the initial
bootstrapping of pkgsrc on your SEYOS system. (I have used pkgsrc for
entire Linux systems for a few years.) I can assist with updating pkgsrc
as needed and as appropriate. Feel free to contact me off-list if you can
arrange remote login to a SEYOS system.

By the way, there are a few Linux distros that use "pkgsrc" -- some even
on Slackware.

You can also discuss pkgsrc for your system on the
pkgsrc-users%NetBSD.org@localhost mailing list.

    Jeremy C. Reed
                        ``Of course it runs NetBSD.''
                            http://www.NetBSD.org/