Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 08:07:14 -0600 (CST) From: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: /usr/local abuse Message-ID: <14900.57234.192112.812567@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <20001211004943.E89853@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <20001210120840.C38697@vger.bsdhome.com> <14899.47196.795281.662619@zircon.seattle.wa.us> <14899.49294.958909.82912@guru.mired.org> <14899.62738.768609.598990@nomad.yogotech.com> <14899.62189.243395.903919@nomad.yogotech.com> <14900.2598.958785.326648@guru.mired.org> <14900.19591.200496.869754@nomad.yogotech.com> <14900.21804.426787.246572@guru.mired.org> <14900.23606.685940.408212@nomad.yogotech.com> <14900.26413.17773.721464@guru.mired.org> <20001211004943.E89853@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> types: > On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 11:33:33PM -0600, Mike Meyer wrote: > > The thing is, the package system has grown into something more than > > that. It really is vendor-supplied and vendor-supported third party > > software, and part of the distribution. > I can back this up. As someone that maintains over 120 FreeBSD Ports, I > get all kinds of email wanting support and this and that tweak in the > Port (and thus pre-compiled Package) that they don't want to have to > download the distfile and do the hacks themselves. In fact many of our > Ports have quite a bit of patching to add very significant functionality > changes than one would get if they took the distfile, built and installed > the software the way the author intended them to. Thus the Ports > Collection Packages are something very specific to FreeBSD and are not > just random 3rd party software. I'm one of the people who send patches to the port maintainer. There are a couple of reasons for this. First, I get the *port* fixed faster that way. In some cases, the original author wasn't interested in the fixes, or was to busy to issue a new release, so the only way to get those into the port was through the port maintainer. The alternative was to quit building those from ports, and start building them as locally maintained software so I could apply the patches. Another reason is that I've found the port maintainer usually has a working relationship with the software author, and so patches that he's reviewed and passed on to the author get dealt with faster than if I sent them on myself. In at least one case, sending patches to the author was completely ignored. Sending them to the port maintainer got the port fixed in a matter of days, and the patches forwarded to the software author were added to the system for the next release (at which time the port patches could go away). <mike To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?14900.57234.192112.812567>