Le lundi 03 décembre 2007 19:37, Ade Lovett a écrit :
I'll thank you for not putting words into my mouth.
Actually, we will thank you for not putting any more words in your own
mouth.
You seem unable to grasp even basic statistical fundamentals of what a
survey entails, and have
On Sunday 02 December 2007 10:01, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
1. What is more important to your personal use of FreeBSD (the ports
system, the underlaying OS, some other aspect)?
FreeBSD man pages seem alot more helpful than their Linux counterparts. And I
can understand FreeBSD Source Code
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
People,
Please.
I joined this list because i have a few ports that list me as the maintainer. I
joined in the assumption that this list would provide information related to my
maintainership.
Now for days i keep getting these immature posts. I am
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Koen Martens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
I am not interested. Should i unsubscribe?
- if your maintainer address is working, you can get relevant mail.
- if you can sit out a storm, do not unsubscribe.
___
On Sun, Dec 02, 2007 at 05:01:35AM -0500, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
As has been hashed out in -ports@ over the last few days there is at
least a need to examine weither or not the current ports system should
remain as is or potentially be re-engineered in the future (estimates
if and when
On Monday 03 December 2007 01:41:14 Andrew Pantyukhin wrote:
On Sun, Dec 02, 2007 at 05:01:35AM -0500, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
As has been hashed out in -ports@ over the last few days there is at
least a need to examine weither or not the current ports system should
remain as is or
On Dec 03, 2007, at 03:08 , David Southwell wrote:
Enough!!
The zeroth group involves those that decide to invoke quasi-religious
concepts where they're completely out of place, in a vain attempt to
make their point.
Live by the code, die by the code.
Show us some code. Or, quite
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Live by the code, die by the code.
Show us some code. Or, quite frankly, since y'all have missed the
subtleties of others, put up, or shut up.
Coding before the problem is well understood is the worst of all
possible solutions... specifically
On Dec 03, 2007, at 08:38 , Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
Coding before the problem is well understood is the worst of all
possible solutions...
Congratulations on snipping the relevant part of my email which
indicated how fundamentally flawed your survey was. Until such time
as you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ade Lovett wrote:
On Dec 03, 2007, at 09:42 , Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
If the questions are flawed then point out where.If the
general concept of a survey vs. user stories vs. what ever then
state which you think is more productive. If your
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Remko Lodder wrote:
Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
Ade Lovett wrote:
Then the community needs to make up it's mind because I have been
criticized for making a wiki for a similar issue (SATA issues on
ICH9(R)) You do sound like Marie Antonetta.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ade Lovett wrote:
On Dec 03, 2007, at 08:38 , Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
Coding before the problem is well understood is the worst of all
possible solutions...
Congratulations on snipping the relevant part of my email which
indicated how
Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
Ade Lovett wrote:
Then the community needs to make up it's mind because I have been
criticized for making a wiki for a similar issue (SATA issues on
ICH9(R)) You do sound like Marie Antonetta. For the time being
as far I can tell the consensus is to keep
On Dec 03, 2007, at 09:42 , Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
If the questions are flawed then point out where.If the general
concept of a survey vs. user stories vs. what ever then state which
you think is more productive. If your problem is the medium/forum the
data is being gathered in see
On Dec 03, 2007, at 10:12 , Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
I have about 20 responses in private email and only the ones you have
seen in public are in this category
Enough said. There are currently ~180 people with direct access to
the ports/ tree (ie: ports committers).
Even assuming all
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ade Lovett wrote:
On Dec 03, 2007, at 10:12 , Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
I have about 20 responses in private email and only the ones you
have seen in public are in this category
Enough said. There are currently ~180 people with direct access to
--On Monday, December 03, 2007 11:38:33 -0500 Aryeh M. Friedman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Coding before the problem is well understood is the worst of all
possible solutions... specifically in many ways thats how to the port
system got into such a bad state
I've run just about every *nix
On Dec 03, 2007, at 10:23 , Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
Only 2 are self-reported maintainers and at least 5 admit to not being
maintainers... I think your main issue is you are 100% in there is
nothing wrong camp and for what ever reason want to convience
everyone else any effort to say/do
Here is a simple example of where improvement would be good.
I add a package the easiest way I know on a slow system.
mybox# pkg_add -r dnetc
Fetching
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-6-stable/Latest/dnetc.tbz...
Done.
= Added group dnetc.
= Added user dnetc.
A statisticaslly valid sample will be difficult here, I mean a slashdot
poll is maybe a way to reach a wide portuion of the userbase, but they all
think freebsd is dead:) Some user will object no matter what you do.
Even if you emailed root of every system that did a portsnap or cvsup or
Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ade Lovett wrote:
On Dec 03, 2007, at 10:12 , Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
I have about 20 responses in private email and only the ones you
have seen in public are in this category
Enough said. There are currently ~180
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ade Lovett wrote:
On Dec 03, 2007, at 10:23 , Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
Only 2 are self-reported maintainers and at least 5 admit to not
being maintainers... I think your main issue is you are 100% in
there is nothing wrong camp and for what ever
On Monday 03 December 2007 10:37:21 Ade Lovett wrote:
On Dec 03, 2007, at 10:23 , Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
Only 2 are self-reported maintainers and at least 5 admit to not being
maintainers... I think your main issue is you are 100% in there is
nothing wrong camp and for what ever reason
--On Monday, December 03, 2007 13:53:06 -0500 Aryeh M. Friedman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have you ever attempted to install the individual ports of a mega
metaport?
Of course I have. And I haven't run into any problems that weren't
solvable.
Before you waste any more time, why don't you
On Monday 03 December 2007 10:59:00 Chuck Robey wrote:
Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ade Lovett wrote:
On Dec 03, 2007, at 10:12 , Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
I have about 20 responses in private email and only the ones you
have seen in public
Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
Paul Schmehl wrote:
--On Monday, December 03, 2007 13:53:06 -0500 Aryeh M. Friedman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have you ever attempted to install the individual ports of a mega
metaport?
Of course I have. And I haven't run into any problems that weren't
Paul Schmehl wrote:
--On Monday, December 03, 2007 13:53:06 -0500 Aryeh M. Friedman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have you ever attempted to install the individual ports of a mega
metaport?
Of course I have. And I haven't run into any problems that weren't
solvable.
Before you waste any more
David Southwell wrote:
Just what is your agenda here?
That's so november 2007, we dont use calenders nowadays
Why all the spite and venom?
If you do not have anything practical to contribute to the current discussion
that takes it forward then why waste your energies saying anything at
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Skip Ford wrote:
Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
Paul Schmehl wrote:
--On Monday, December 03, 2007 13:53:06 -0500 Aryeh M.
Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have you ever attempted to install the individual ports of a
mega metaport?
Of course I have.
On Monday 03 December 2007 11:53:46 Remko Lodder wrote:
David Southwell wrote:
Just what is your agenda here?
That's so november 2007, we dont use calenders nowadays
Do you mean a colender or a calendar?
Why all the spite and venom?
If you do not have anything practical to contribute
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Now, stop this thread, stop the discussion, build something, and
come back, if you cannot code or produce something with whatever
you think the tree should be using, then *silence*.
I know this will get me flamed but I wonder if any of
On Dec 2, 2007, at 3:54 PM, Miguel Mendez wrote:
I already replied to your questions in private but I wonder if you
took a look at
pkgsrc and the enhancements the OpenBSD people have done the pkg*
commands and whether you think borrowing from them would be useful.
I've been using pkgsrc on
On Dec 3, 2007, at 1:39 AM, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
I am purposelly not looking at any previous solutions right now... If
and when it is determined that changes to the current system are
needed I will look at them then for ideas of what has not worked.
(like the Internet or other large
On Dec 2, 2007, at 5:01 AM, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
1. What is more important to your personal use of FreeBSD (the ports
system, the underlaying OS, some other aspect)?
The core OS. Ports is icing on the cake.
2. How frequently do you interact with the ports systems and what is
the
On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 03:01:37PM -0500, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
Now, stop this thread, stop the discussion, build something, and
come back, if you cannot code or produce something with whatever
you think the tree should be using, then *silence*.
I know this will get me flamed but
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Edwin Groothuis wrote:
On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 03:01:37PM -0500, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
Now, stop this thread, stop the discussion, build something, and
come back, if you cannot code or produce something with whatever
you think the tree should
--On Monday, December 03, 2007 14:20:16 -0500 Aryeh M. Friedman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Try this as a challenge then install xdm cleanly on the first try
without having to install any additional ports from the command line
(what it drags in is fine)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] make deinstall
Paul Schmehl wrote:
Here's a hint that would help a *ton* of users. Don't try to install a
port until your ports tree is up to date. Completely up to date - as
is, run portsnap or cvs or cvsup *first*, *then* try to install your port.
I have several possible solutions (contact me privately
On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 17:23:33 -0500 Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
This is why I a asked informally for a p4 account (the person I asked
should be asking formally on my behalf soon)...
To whom it may concern: please, *please*, no... Too much noise...
WBR
--
Boris Samorodov (bsam)
Research
On Mon, 2007-12-03 at 10:41 -0800, Brian wrote:
Here is a simple example of where improvement would be good.
I add a package the easiest way I know on a slow system.
mybox# pkg_add -r dnetc
Fetching
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-6-stable/Latest/dnetc.tbz...
Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chuck Robey wrote:
Paul Schmehl wrote:
Why the silly games? I get the feeling that Aryeh is honestly not
understanding that he's trying to change the basic way that things
get done in FreeBSD. He doesn't see that. In
Having said that dependencies often do depend on the order the leaves
are installed, because some ports will use alternate dependencies
according to what's already there. It makes things a lot easier to
maintain.
___
btw xdm is not the worst
On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 17:57:40 -0500
Aryeh M. Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually what see is a signficant difference in the way the banner is
displayed and no I will not change the rules becuase the root issue is
xdm-banner is only installed if you make the metaport with nothing
else
On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 20:23:20 -0600, Aryeh Friedman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having said that dependencies often do depend on the order the leaves
are installed, because some ports will use alternate dependencies
according to what's already there. It makes things a lot easier to
maintain.
On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 16:15:10 -0600, Aryeh M. Friedman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
=== Cleaning for xdm-1.1.6_2
What was I supposed to find?
Did you actually run xdm or just assume because it compiled that it
was installed the same way in all
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jeremy Messenger wrote:
On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 20:23:20 -0600, Aryeh Friedman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having said that dependencies often do depend on the order the leaves
are installed, because some ports will use alternate dependencies
On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 21:03:50 -0600, Aryeh M. Friedman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jeremy Messenger wrote:
On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 20:23:20 -0600, Aryeh Friedman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having said that dependencies often do depend on the order the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
As has been hashed out in -ports@ over the last few days there is at
least a need to examine weither or not the current ports system should
remain as is or potentially be re-engineered in the future (estimates
if and when needed vary from ASAP to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I promised not to venture my opinion on things but this one needs it
Too much talk from people not willing to do the heavy lifting.
There have been a number of serious attempts and in depth research
into various ports system issues (I still need
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
3. What is the single best aspect of the current system?
Good people doing the heavy lifting
4. What is the single worst aspect of the current system?
Too much talk from people not willing to do the heavy lifting.
8. How long have you used
On Sunday 02 December 2007 06:41:12 Dan Langille wrote:
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
3. What is the single best aspect of the current system?
Good people doing the heavy lifting
4. What is the single worst aspect of the current system?
Too much talk from people not
On Dec 2, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
Hi,
As has been hashed out in -ports@ over the last few days there is at
least a need to examine weither or not the current ports system should
remain as is or potentially be re-engineered in the future (estimates
if and when needed vary
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 13:37:22 -0600, David Southwell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sunday 02 December 2007 06:41:12 Dan Langille wrote:
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
3. What is the single best aspect of the current system?
Good people doing the heavy lifting
4. What is the
Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
Too much talk from people not willing to do the heavy lifting.
There have been a number of serious attempts and in depth research
into various ports system issues (I still need to wade through a
rather long one sent to me privately)... an other question did you
read
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Darren Pilgrim wrote:
Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
Too much talk from people not willing to do the heavy lifting.
There have been a number of serious attempts and in depth
research into various ports system issues (I still need to wade
through a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Miguel Mendez wrote:
On Dec 2, 2007, at 11:01 AM, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
Hi,
As has been hashed out in -ports@ over the last few days there is
at least a need to examine weither or not the current ports
system should remain as is or
3. What is the single best aspect of the current system?
Easy to write ports, or modify those created by others.
4. What is the single worst aspect of the current system?
Slowness of pkg_version and make index.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jeremy Messenger wrote:
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 13:37:22 -0600, David Southwell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sunday 02 December 2007 06:41:12 Dan Langille wrote:
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
3. What is the single best aspect of the
58 matches
Mail list logo
