Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 09:36:03 -0700 (MST) From: Brett Taylor <brett@peloton.physics.montana.edu> To: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> Cc: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, Bill Fumerola <billf@chc-chimes.com>, Adam Turoff <aturoff@isinet.com>, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Ports Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9903090922530.20218-100000@peloton.physics.montana.edu> In-Reply-To: <36E4D59E.89ACD0F4@softweyr.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,
On Tue, 9 Mar 1999, Wes Peters wrote:
> Brett Glass wrote:
> > They're often adding the port for the first time. Suddenly, they
> > want a Web server, a new editor, a network utility. They get an old
> > one with security holes. Not good.
> > I want to be able to tell my system, "I want the latest version of
> > Program X for the version of the operating system I'm currently
> > running. Make it so." There's no reason why the ports collection
> > can't resolve the dependencies and do that.
> There is one really simple reason: somebody has to DO it. A port is
> based on a particular snapshot of the sources; if the developers move
> stuff around the sources the port patch files don't work anymore. It
> would take constant work for ports to be maintained for any given
> release.
Wes you're talking to a brick wall. Brett wants the best of all worlds -
he wants to run old releases and yet still follow the cutting edge of
ports.
Now he'll say he can't track ports because he's running 2.2.8-RELEASE. He
can but he's unwilling to accept that some things may not work because
ports track -STABLE and the conversion from a.out to ELF caused a lot of
hassle for the ports team.
> Since the port maintainers are more interested in doing this for
> -stable and/or -current, I nominate YOU to provide this valuable
> server to the "trailing edge" corps.
What, Brett do work? He's unwilling to be maintainer on a single port
less yet all 2100 for X.X.X-RELEASE (where X.X.X is the version Brett is
running) - I wouldn't hold your breath here.
> > Non sequitur. I don't want to have a "versionless" or unstable
> > version of the OS on the machine just to get a recent version of a
> > ported app.
Oh yeah - sorry 3.1-STABLE. Sorry - that is versionless huh. I wonder
what the 3.1 means?
> > If someone out there is taking the time to do builds, I should be
> > able to use them. Otherwise, the port maintainer's time and effort
> > are not being used effectively to bring the most benefit to users.
> This is a volunteer project. Many of the port maintainers are using
> their time effectively to solve THEIR needs, and then sharing this
> with all other FreeBSD users. If you want something else, feel free
> to contribute it back to the project when you're done.
And again, Wes notes the key point Brett can't seem to grasp: it's a
volunteer effort.
Brett, why don't you do what you said you were going to do in another
thread and go roll out BBSD (Brett's BSD) and go promote that and maintain
ports for all releases for all time and leave the FreeBSD lists alone.
Now, time to go add Brett to my .procmailrc so I don't see anymore of his
silliness.
Brett (not Glass) Taylor
***********************************************************
Brett Taylor brett@peloton.physics.montana.edu *
brett@daemonnews.org *
*
http://www.daemonnews.org/ *
***********************************************************
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9903090922530.20218-100000>