Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 13:31:02 +0200 From: Neil Blakey-Milner <nbm@mithrandr.moria.org> To: ports@FreeBSD.org Cc: asami@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Supporting old releases Message-ID: <20010315133102.A96440@rapier.smartspace.co.za> In-Reply-To: <20010315090544.A73646@rapier.smartspace.co.za>; from nbm@mithrandr.moria.org on Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 09:05:44AM %2B0200 References: <3AAEA0B6.669CB86C@originative.co.uk> <20010313143849.A19262@mollari.cthul.hu> <3AAEA597.81830243@originative.co.uk> <20010313150218.A19727@mollari.cthul.hu> <20010313181716.K61859@ohm.physics.purdue.edu> <20010314100942.A90458@rapier.smartspace.co.za> <yfkpufkkvp2.fsf@vader.clickarray.com> <20010314213338.A40018@rapier.smartspace.co.za> <20010314130755.B1851@dragon.nuxi.com> <20010315090544.A73646@rapier.smartspace.co.za>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On another list, I wrote: > On Wed 2001-03-14 (13:07), David O'Brien wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 09:33:38PM +0200, Neil Blakey-Milner wrote: > > > In that case, I'd ask for someone in the community who has a 4.0-RELEASE > > > machine (should be able to find one) to backport the changes, so we have > > > "real" 4.0-RELEASE binaries. > > > > Impossible, you cannot go back in time. > > I'm missing something. Why not? Apparently I "missed" the view that 40upgrade should allow people to run packages built for 4.1-RELEASE and 4.2-RELEASE. Since I was never exposed to this belief (see below), I didn't imagine anyone else did. I don't think the *upgrade methods made any such assurance, and I don't think they should. 40upgrade package comment says: ``A convenience package to upgrade your 4.0 system to 4-stable for ports'', but description says ``This package will allow you to upgrade your 4.0R system to 4-stable, so you can compile and use all ports in ports-current.''. Both seem a bit wrong - it doesn't perform the actual upgrade, just sufficient to "use ports", depending on what that means. How about "A convenience package to upgrade your 4.0 system sufficiently to use updated /usr/ports", or "A convenience package to upgrade your 4.0 system sufficiently to run packages built for later versions". Satoshi, what _is_ the intended purpose of the upgrade kit? Do we make the assurance that "installing the upgrade kit will let you use packages built for later versions of FreeBSD"? If we don't, then it is easy. If we do, I think we should at least split the upgrade kit into ports (ie, /usr/ports) and package-specific upgrade kits. I couldn't care less about being able to install packages from later releases (I couldn't imagine wanting to do that; I'd rather just make world or do a binary upgrade), but I care a lot about being able to build ports on older releases (which I can easily do if I overload port.mkversion, even on a 3.3-RELEASE box). I don't have access to a 4.0 machine at my current workplace, but as an example, we'd only need http://mithrandr.moria.org/40upgrade-2001.03.15.tgz to use ports (not quite true, I never bumped port.mkversion), with the possible addition of pkg_create and the other package tools if they're required to _build_ packages from bsd.port.mk. We could have another package, which I imagine would be less important to most FreeBSD users (feel free to disagree), that allows this ability to use binaries built for later releases. As David explains, this package would be a lot harder to create, if not "impossible" for some cases. At least we won't have to wait for ages to just use /usr/ports. Neil -- Neil Blakey-Milner nbm@mithrandr.moria.org 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?20010315133102.A96440>