From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Fri Jun 23 05:23:36 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24168D9CC90 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 05:23:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@opsec.eu) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F3BE78827 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 05:23:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@opsec.eu) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 0B8C8D9CC8F; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 05:23:36 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B2D2D9CC8E for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 05:23:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@opsec.eu) Received: from home.opsec.eu (home.opsec.eu [IPv6:2001:14f8:200::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1E6B78825; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 05:23:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@opsec.eu) Received: from pi by home.opsec.eu with local (Exim 4.89 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1dOH4A-0007qx-Pm; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 07:23:34 +0200 Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 07:23:34 +0200 From: Kurt Jaeger To: Julian Elischer Cc: freebsd-ports Subject: Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by OS version Message-ID: <20170623052334.GC29157@home.opsec.eu> References: <20170622121856.haikphjpvr6ofxn3@ivaldir.net> <20170622141644.yadxdubynuhzygcy@ivaldir.net> <4jrnkcpurfmojfdnglqg5f97sohcuv56sv@4ax.com> <20170622211126.GA6878@lonesome.com> <20170623023954.GA29157@home.opsec.eu> <856b02db-26b2-91c5-acc6-f62fc99af49e@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <856b02db-26b2-91c5-acc6-f62fc99af49e@freebsd.org> X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 05:23:36 -0000 Hi! > > There's a blog post from one of the folks that explains the > > idea behind that 'fast update' mode of operations, and yes, > > he's doing real work. > > http://blog.koehntopp.info/index.php/1776-rolling-out-patches-and-changes-often-and-fast/ > That is ONE kind of installation. Well, there's the thinking that in the not-to-far future, everything is connected, and you'll need to be able to update at any time because of whatever security/threat that IT ecosystem throws at you. > It DOES NOT WORK when th most you can upgrade a customer system is > once a year or once every two years. The 'other side' of the debate thinks: Well, if they think this is the way to do it, they have a problem and need to change their procedures. The viewpoint is: That system can start debating with the next worm/trojan coming along, but that won't help. The assumption is: everything is connected/on the internet, and not even voluntarily. Think connected cars, IoT etc. > I will add that such users would help their own case by fixing such > issues and feeding the changes back to their branches upstream, > thus helping maintain the branch. Maybe we could have a system of > "corporate sponsors" for these branches. Given the state of fundraising in open source, I doubt that this will be viable. -- pi@opsec.eu +49 171 3101372 3 years to go !