Well, here we go again!
in [FreeBSD]
|
From: Bob Eager on 29 Mar 2010 02:43 On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 21:36:25 -0600, Bob Melson wrote: > On Sunday 28 March 2010 15:23, Torfinn Ingolfsen (tingo(a)start.no) > opined: > >> Bob Melson wrote: >>> Ports freeze is over and the overnight update of the ports tree >>> results in >>> literally 100s of ports to be updated in order to stay current. >>> Problem >> >> Well, they told you to keep your hands off ports for at least ten days: >> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2010-March/060246.html >> >> So, why didn't you listen? >> -- >> Torfinn Ingolfsen, >> Norway > Well, Torfinn, it's like this, y'see: I read /usr/ports/UPDATING, > which, at the time, had no mention of the current mess and how I had to > hold my mouth or how many times I might have to turn widdershins while > encanting the FreeBSD spell. > > Secondly, not everybody subscribes to the mailing lists, particularly > when they're not active porters, maintainers, commiters or otherwise > actively involved with development. I agree. That mailing list isn't for the average user - or shouldn't be. Now, if that sort of thing were regukarly posted to the users' list - and users were told they really should read it - then, fine. But what's wrong with putting a *timely* notice in UPDATING? Virtually *every* user uses ports. And most will update them. They shouldn't have to read what is essentially a developers' list to find out they shoukd wait a while. -- Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
From: Bob Eager on 29 Mar 2010 11:17 On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 14:36:17 +0100, Chronos wrote: > Torfinn Ingolfsen wrote: > >> Well, they told you to keep your hands off ports for at least ten days: >> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2010 >> -March/060246.html > > That really should have gone to the low-volume freebsd-announce@ list, > too. Not everybody subscribes to the high volume lists but most users > really should be subscribed to freebsd-announce. Sorry, yes. That was the list I was thinking of. I was just about to do a ports update, and only this thread stopped me! -- Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
From: Warren Block on 29 Mar 2010 11:44 Bob Melson <amia9018(a)mypacks.net> wrote: > On Sunday 28 March 2010 15:23, Torfinn Ingolfsen (tingo(a)start.no) opined: > >> Bob Melson wrote: >>> Ports freeze is over and the overnight update of the ports tree results >>> in >>> literally 100s of ports to be updated in order to stay current. Problem >> >> Well, they told you to keep your hands off ports for at least ten days: >> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2010-March/060246.html >> >> So, why didn't you listen? >> -- >> Torfinn Ingolfsen, >> Norway > Well, Torfinn, it's like this, y'see: I read /usr/ports/UPDATING, which, > at the time, had no mention of the current mess and how I had to hold my > mouth or how many times I might have to turn widdershins while encanting > the FreeBSD spell. > > Secondly, not everybody subscribes to the mailing lists, particularly when > they're not active porters, maintainers, commiters or otherwise actively > involved with development. Updating ports often and not watching the mailing lists are kind of at odds. You could add *default date=2010.03.28.06.00.00 # here be dragons to your ports-supfile. But how do you tell when it's safe to remove? -- Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota * USA
From: Bob Melson on 29 Mar 2010 12:23 On Monday 29 March 2010 09:44, Warren Block (wblock(a)wonkity.com) opined: > Bob Melson <amia9018(a)mypacks.net> wrote: >> On Sunday 28 March 2010 15:23, Torfinn Ingolfsen (tingo(a)start.no) >> opined: >> >>> Bob Melson wrote: >>>> Ports freeze is over and the overnight update of the ports tree >>>> results in >>>> literally 100s of ports to be updated in order to stay current. >>>> Problem >>> >>> Well, they told you to keep your hands off ports for at least ten days: >>> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2010-March/060246.html >>> >>> So, why didn't you listen? >>> -- >>> Torfinn Ingolfsen, >>> Norway >> Well, Torfinn, it's like this, y'see: I read /usr/ports/UPDATING, >> which, at the time, had no mention of the current mess and how I had to >> hold my mouth or how many times I might have to turn widdershins while >> encanting the FreeBSD spell. >> >> Secondly, not everybody subscribes to the mailing lists, particularly >> when they're not active porters, maintainers, commiters or otherwise >> actively involved with development. > > Updating ports often and not watching the mailing lists are kind of at > odds. > > You could add > > *default date=2010.03.28.06.00.00 > # here be dragons > > to your ports-supfile. But how do you tell when it's safe to remove? > > -- > Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota * USA Warren: That makes no sense. I have a system. The system has ports - needs 'em to be useful. The ports need to be updated for various reasons. Users are encouraged to cvsup/csup a new ports tree an a regular basis and, in conjunction with that, to read /usr/ports/UPDATING. Nowhere is it mentioned that Joe User must or should read, e.g., freebsd-ports or freebad-announce or any other subscription mailing list. Seems to me that if the recommended procedure is as stated, then that is the necessary and sufficient condition for a successful upgrade of installed ports. But that's not the point and never was. The point is/was, or so I thought when writing my original post, that recent upgrade cycles have been, shall we say, less than encouraging and that, instead of getting better, the situation seems to be getting worse each cycle, with multiple ports broken because the s/w _they're_ dependent on is broken or incompletely tested or, well, you pick a reason. That should NEVER be and updates should not be announced until there's some assurance that Joe User - who may be a home user or an admin somewhere or anybody from naive to experienced - can reliably do an upgrade by following the instructions in the handbook. But to have, e.g., the multiple ports that rely on cairo fail to upgrade because cairo can't be upgraded because IT depends on png ... That's a failure of the process and is inexcusable - notwithstanding I understand that this is a largely volunteer effort and that the folks doing the porting/maintaining are unpaid and do what they do out of dedication to FreeBSD. My original post was one of frustration. I know things will be corrected and that the sun will continue to shine, birds will sing again and flowers will bloom. I can't claim the title as oldest known user, but I have been using FBSD since 2.1.7 and will continue to use it into the unknown and distant future. I've watched the system grow and improve, but I've also seen the ports _system_ deteriorate at the same time. And, no, I don't know what to do about it, unless it's something like what the "big boys" do, with quarterly or semi-annual update/upgrade releases, with in-between special fixes as necessary for security or major breakage. Bob Melson -- Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas ----- Nothing astonishes men so much as common sense and plain dealing. Ralph Waldo Emerson
From: Bob Eager on 29 Mar 2010 12:23 On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 15:44:29 +0000, Warren Block wrote: > Updating ports often and not watching the mailing lists are kind of at > odds. What, all of them? Surely the list where it *was* posted is for those developing ports, not those using them? I know it was not meant, but the use of the word 'often' is a bit strange! It should be 'updating ports at all'....! -- Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
First
|
Prev
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 Prev: Stale BINDings Next: NYC LOCAL: Tuesday 30 March 2010 NYLUG Hackfest |