Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 19:48:55 +0200 From: Roman Kennke <roman@ontographics.com> To: Gary Kline <kline@tao.thought.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RELEASE_X_Y_Z branches/tags maintained?? Message-ID: <1098726535.672.4.camel@moonlight> In-Reply-To: <20041025173456.GA95850@thought.org> References: <1098641975.705.10.camel@moonlight> <20041025083705.GA16273@anembo.nu.org> <20041025173456.GA95850@thought.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Am Mo, den 25.10.2004 schrieb Gary Kline um 19:34:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 11:45:21AM +0200, Roman Kennke wrote:
> > Am Mo, den 25.10.2004 schrieb Christopher Vance um 10:37:
> > > >> > I have a question regarding the branches/tags of the ports tree for
> > > >> > stable releases. Are they in any way maintained. For instance I would
> > > >> > like to see security fixes and corrections like changed download URLs be
> > > >> > committed there.
> > >
> > > You have a choice between
> > >
> > > (1) a system with fewer packages/ports, but each one related to
> > > several supported OS versions,
> > >
> > > or
> > >
> > > (2) a system with more packages/ports, but they're not tied to any OS version.
> > >
> > > If you want something like (1) on FreeBSD, you can always capture the
> > > ports tree as it was when your OS version was released (it's even
> > > tagged for you) and update only those parts you care about. You get
> > > to follow any advisories yourself (try portaudit). But if it breaks,
> > > you get to fix all the pieces yourself.
> >
> > Maybe, if there is _enough_ interest, somebody (starting with me??)
> > could start a separate (from FreeBSD) project, that aims to maintain a
> > stable FreeBSD ports tree. It could start out with a subset of ports,
> > architectures and OS versions for the beginning, and scale when
> > resources are available. It could occasionally grab a tagged ports tree
> > and develop a stable version out of it.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> I think your idea has lots of merit, Roman--to stick my
> two cents' worth in. Porting isn't that hard once you've
> found and fixed <<whatever>> problems. Most bugs aren't that
> hard to fix; some are bloody murder. After that, to create
> a port for FBSD is a lot of grungy detail work. For
> example, creating the patch files, then the new
> distfiles and the ancillary files that make certain
> that everything Just-Works{tm}.
yeah I know, I have created a _few_ ports myself.
> Once you've done a few ports--either your own hacking
> or someone else's--creating a port gets pretty easy.
> Takes a few hours/port/architecture. Before aiming for
> a separate project, it may pay to work within the ports
> group for awhile.
I'm just thinking over some ideas. Another idea is to go with NetBSDs
pkgsrc instead, they also support FreeBSD and have a stable branch
(although this needs some work to be maintained). The wheel hasn't to be
reinvented X times ;-)
/Roman
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1098726535.672.4.camel>