Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 15:39:39 -0800 (PST) From: Simon Shapiro <shimon@simon-shapiro.org> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Yest one more: devel/crosssco Message-ID: <XFMail.980331153939.shimon@simon-shapiro.org> In-Reply-To: <6232.891386287@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 31-Mar-98 Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: >> What you say is logically impossible. ANY system will get contaminated >> with the ports building. To take this argument to its logical >> conclusion, > > If you'll read my posting again, you'll plainly see that I never once > mentioned contamination resulting from the building of ports, I was > simply discussing the OPERATING SYSTEM'S evolution on your system. > A 2.2-3.0 upgraded system is not the best test vehicle for determining > whether or not a given -current port works and if you want to do > this kind of verification, you should start with a clean 3.0 system. My apologies. I thought I said I did. The re-install did not happen just a moment before building the ports, but a while ago. 9-Dec-1997 to be exact. The objection I have is to doing this re-install on a regular basis. Too expensive, too slow, too disruptice, and too dangerous. BTW, where did you get the idea sendero is a 2.2-3.0 upgrade? > Now if you're talking about the divergent problem of PORTS POLLUTION > then I can simply say that I don't believe that there's ever been a > serious effort to make sure that you absolutely cannot hose yourself > by installing conflicting ports or packages. Some truly obvious > clashes like the warring TCL or Tk ports have been dealt with, but I > don't think that this necessarily extends across all 1300 ports. I am not attacking the ports concept, nor mechanism. Actually, I am not attacking anyone or anything. I just find, in certain directories, certain packages that barf. > For that kind of conflict resolution, there's only one useful thing > that you can post and that's the *specific* ports which are colliding > with one another. Simply posting the failure output from a single > port only shifts the majority of the burden onto someone else. :-) 1300 ports. You want interaction analysis? At 2 minutes per port, 45 minutes per clean install, 1300x1300x2x45. Nah, I'll pass... :-) My shrinking brain says that any developer/maintainer of any package that I reported breaking (I can put the rest of them in my web page) can get an account on sendero and prove where my system is currupted. I will donate $10.00 per bug in my system to the FreeBSD project. This is NOT to say my system is bugless. This is simply an incentive to substantiate unbased claims :-) ---------- Sincerely Yours, Simon Shapiro Shimon@Simon-Shapiro.ORG Voice: 503.799.2313 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.980331153939.shimon>