Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2017 13:44:10 -0800 From: "C Hutchinson" <portmaster@bsdforge.com> To: <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Install of pkg fuse-ntfs fails because of undefined symbol in pkg!?! Message-ID: <5be4963b058a6200d3d817cbe7142540@ultimatedns.net> In-Reply-To: <gs0u9c9j989cog6v112klk2tppplqj9pku@4ax.com> References: <dvvl9chf9h22dpjto35d44enid819p9rnc@4ax.com> <h91m9cpbmp6js1km1bson74he5uuui9r6h@4ax.com> <1c6cccac-b151-d13c-c763-b336c4680118@freebsd.org> <ndjm9cl4samqgioi25ro8p2q6liimvr1h4@4ax.com> <35a953e3-918b-fc32-d990-51f7da16c884@FreeBSD.org> <AE0D514C-D235-462D-B31D-66FC619D9F4D@lastsummer.de> <20170209161249.GL2092@kib.kiev.ua> <20170209162600.GP13006@home.opsec.eu> <lnbr9cdn91jr8vtkecdv6enkafanjh8adg@4ax.com> <20170210164615.GQ13006@home.opsec.eu>, <gs0u9c9j989cog6v112klk2tppplqj9pku@4ax.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 11 Feb 2017 07:31:10 -0500 <scratch65535@att.net> wrote
> On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 17:46:15 +0100, Kurt Jaeger <lists@opsec.eu>
> wrote:
>
> >Hi!
>
> Moin!
>
> >
> >> On Thu, 9 Feb 2017 17:26:00 +0100, Kurt Jaeger wrote
> >> >Getting the ports/pkg tree moving with the velocity necessary
> >> >to cope with the fast-changing world, sometimes things break
> >> >and we all try to prevent this. Sometimes, mistakes happen...
> >>
> >> But it's the velocity that's the problem, Kurt.
> >
> >While I very much sympathize with "The world rotates too fast,
> >I want to get off", for me it looks like as a project we do
> >not have alternatives.
>
> Why not? What would happen to fBSD that's not already happening?
> Why aren't people asking what's going on and how to turn it
> around? Could it be because they're too busy being busy?
>
> There's a well-known problem that kills ground-attack pilots all
> the time (or it used to; maybe they have safety features built
> into the aircraft now). They become fixated on their target, and
> they bring the nose of their aircraft further and further down to
> keep the target in their sights. Which causes them to fly right
> into the ground!
>
> Fixation is a problem in other fields, too.
>
> >
> >> Do you know of anyone who has successfully defended, or even
> >> tried to defend, the current manic pace of revision and
> >> obsoleting?
> >
> >Is it defense, if we see many projects (open source etc)
> >shorten their cycle time (e.g. php7), because they see the need to
> >add features or patch security issues (and breaks APIs/ABIs doing either) ?
>
> It seems more like an excuse than a defence, to me. Is it
> pushing Linux back? If not, what *would* push Linux back? Why
> is Linux so successful even though fBSD is older and better, and
> was once completely dominant in the space? What are the Linux
> projects doing that we're not?
>
> >
> >And if we try to keep up and for this, if we add features to the
> >ports framework ? I'm doing this (application mgmt on unix systems)
> >for a long time now, a quarter of a century, and I see no viable
> >alternative in the problem space we work in.
>
> I trained as a clinical psychologist, not in computer science or
> ee. We learned that adults are notoriously resistant to change
This is a very astute observation. One I recognized as an absolute;
some two and a half decades ago, myself. Well done!
> (not that we hadn't noticed that ourselves, most of us, but it
> was nice to have it confirmed "officially").
>
> But change is possible, even for adults. The key to change is to
> realise, at the gut level, that change *is* possible, that things
> need *not* always be as they are now. That life really truly
> can be better.
>
> That's really hard for most adults to believe. The prospect of
> change is terrifying because it threatens us with loss of
> control.
The largest fail in recent history, in this regard was pkg(8).
Not that pkg itself is bad, per se; but in the way it was
"presented". Or rather "dropped" like a bomb. Without having
been "vetted" prior, by those that would now be /required/ to use
it -- not an option.
The "magic bullet" is when the "change" is perceived as being a
change they "wanted", or "asked for".
FreeBSD has seen *many* requests for change(s) over the years.
Most of which are dismissed, ignored, or outright rejected.
Even tho many were variations of the same.
Solution? /Listen/ to those requests. Perform a pattern match
to discover similarities in requests, and propose what could
be perceived "feasible" implementations of those requests. Then
implement them, and you'll gain a enthusiastic following.
Period.
>
> But we don't have to lose control. We can change a bit at a
> time, staying in control all the while. All we need is the will
> to do it. (The world is in the mess it's in because, it seems,
> most of those who have the will to change use it for malignant
> purposes --the last several US presidents being cases in point)
>
> >
> >I also see that this very fast speed uses up huge amounts of
> >person power and compute resources (all those folks rebuilding
> >many ports in their build hosts). But it's not easy to stop off
> >this planet 8-}
>
> I would never urge that we jump off the planet. It'd be too hard
> to breathe outside the atmospheric envelope. :-)
>
> But that doesn't mean we're currently doing the right things to
> regain share from Linux and save FreeBSD.
This is NOT, nor has never has been a "Linux vs BSD" thing. Linux
is not UNIX. Ahem... Let me rephrase that;
This is NOT a Linux vs BSD thing, anymore than a Windows vs BSD
thing.
This is an "Operating System of choice" thing. If your OS provides
what a majority of what people need, and want; you're successful,
and popular. It's as simple as that.
That's all I have to say in this matter. I generally shy away
from such discussions. As history proves that they devolve into
a "bikeshed(tm)"
-- PHK.
Over, and out.
--Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5be4963b058a6200d3d817cbe7142540>