Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

release: Add missing dependencies in the minimal OCI image
ClosedPublic

Authored by dfr on Nov 18 2024, 4:32 PM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
Unknown Object (File)
Sat, Jan 17, 6:23 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Thu, Jan 1, 7:54 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Nov 28 2025, 5:51 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Nov 25 2025, 7:54 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Nov 4 2025, 12:37 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Nov 2 2025, 11:33 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Oct 30 2025, 1:38 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Oct 25 2025, 1:30 AM

Diff Detail

Repository
rG FreeBSD src repository
Lint
Lint Not Applicable
Unit
Tests Not Applicable

Event Timeline

dfr requested review of this revision.Nov 18 2024, 4:32 PM

These seem like they should be dependencies of other packages? Or does pkgbase not register dependencies properly?

emaste added a subscriber: emaste.

I guess fetch(1) does not require much extra space over libfetch in the FreeBSD-fetch pkg, so not a big deal.

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Nov 18 2024, 5:00 PM

Indeed FreeBSD-pkg-bootstrap should presumably depend on these three

Indeed FreeBSD-pkg-bootstrap should presumably depend on these three

This isn't a problem on 15-CURRENT so probably the dependencies are fixed there. Strictly speaking, this diff is not necessary for the main branch but its harmless so I plan to merge to main so that the OCI release bits don't diverge between main and stable/14.

This isn't a problem on 15-CURRENT so probably the dependencies are fixed there.

Oh, that makes sense. Once we know how the dependency works properly in main (@bapt, @manu?) we can omit this there.

I'm ok with this but let's give some pkgbase people a chance to comment in case this is something which should be fixed on their side.

I'm going to land this now with a short MFC timer. Still trying to figure out why current doesn't need this.

let's give some pkgbase people a chance to comment in case this is something which should be fixed on their side

It is apparently already fixed in main, but we don't know which commit is responsible. I think the plan will be to MFC this change, then once we find the appropriate main commit revert this with reference to it.