Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 09 May 2014 18:44:22 +0200
From:      John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st>
To:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Unable to use ports on 8.3 or earlier since r352986
Message-ID:  <536D05E6.10905@marino.st>
In-Reply-To: <EDCDD12BB5FA4EACA2A91C4A108CAD5C@multiplay.co.uk>
References:  <495738D66545411BA78B31A6615EFA48@multiplay.co.uk> <CAHcXP%2BcyLKCXejUT=A9sGnwGQ-0KfG2VLnzEd79KBGy238=jzQ@mail.gmail.com> <EDCDD12BB5FA4EACA2A91C4A108CAD5C@multiplay.co.uk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 5/9/2014 18:33, Steven Hartland wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Big Lebowski" <spankthespam@gmail.com>
> 
> 
>> Well, the EoL was announced in January, and it is what its name is:
>> end of
>> life. There have been changes waiting to happen just for the 8.3 to go
>> away, so when the day was reached, they've been applied. This doesnt seem
>> very bad, but instead, just about time, since there was no reason to hold
>> them off any longer.
> 
> In an ideal world everyone would have migrated off, but its not an ideal
> world so being friendly to our users and not breaking everything in ports
> at the first available opportunity would be nice.

I'll stress the previous point again.  The change that broke this was
desired 8 months ago.  It was applied as soon as it was legal to do so.

Anyone who knowingly chose not migrate off before the EOL pretty much is
getting a lesson about why that was an unwise decision.  That lesson is
not specific to FreeBSD.


> Users may well be quite happy to port the small number of OS security fixes
> until they have completed their upgrades, I know thats something we plan to
> do here. Ports on the other hand is a different matter, as the number of
> fixes / changes is much higher so makes it impractical.


They were supposed to have completed their upgrades prior to the EOL.


>> From what I've read there doesn't seem to be a must have reason for this
> change, if this is indeed the case is there any reason not to consider
> users?
> 
> One example that springs to mind is the release version of pfsense is still
> 8.3 so being to still compile updated ports with fixes for that is very
> useful.


I don't know anything about pfsense, or why it needs to compile ports,
but I think you should asked them why they haven't had a release prior
to 8.3 EOL.  That's probably an excellent question.

John



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?536D05E6.10905>