On 06/03/12 15:29, Erich wrote: > Hi, > > On 03 June 2012 PM 5:14:10 Adam Strohl wrote: >> On 6/3/2012 11:14, Erich wrote: >>> What I really do not understand in this whole discussion is very simple. Is >>> it just a few people who run into problems like this or is this simply >>> ignored by the people who set the strategy for FreeBSD? >>> >>> I mention since yeares here that putting version numbers onto the port tree >>> would solve many of these problems. All I get as an answer is that it is >>> not possible. >>> >>> I think that this should be easily possible with the limitation that older >>> versions do not have security fixes. Yes, but of what help is a security >>> fix if there is no running port for the fix? >> >> I feel like I'm missing something. Why would you ever want to go back >> to an old version of the ports tree? You're ignoring tons of security >> issues!
... I think the PNG update isn't a security issue. And for not being a security issue, it triggered an inadequate mess! >> >> And if a port build is broken then the maintainer needs to fix it, that >> is the solution. Look at the comment of the maintainer of LibreOffice ... >> >> I must be missing something else here, it just seems like the underlying >> "need" for this is misguided (and dangerous from a security perspective). > > yes, you miss a very simple thing. Updated this morning your ports tree. Your > client asks for something for Monday morning for which you need now a program > which needs some kind of PNG but you did not install it. ... I spent now two complete days watching my boxes updating their ports. Several ports do not compile anymore (inkscape, libreoffice, libxul, to name some of the very hurting ones!). > > Do you have a machine that is fast enough to upgrade all your ports and still > finish what your client needs Monday morning? Even my fastest box, a brand new 6 core Sandy-Bridge-E, wasn't capable of compiling all the ports in due time. Several ports requested attendance, several, as mentioned, didn't compile out of the blue. > > The ports tree is not broken as such. Only the installation gets broken in > some sense. Have a version number there would allow people to go back to the > last known working ports tree, install the software - or whatever has to be > done - with a working system. > > Of course, the next step will be an upgrade. But only after the work which > brings in the money is done. > > You do not face this problem on Windows. You can run a 10 year old 'kernel' > and still install modern software. > > Erich I like having a very modern system with the most recent software. But in some cases, like these days with the PNG, FreeBSD's ports becomes again a problem. There is no convenient way to downgrade or allow the user/admin managing how to deal with the load of updates.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
