From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 9 09:10:07 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E5B0106566C for ; Fri, 9 Sep 2011 09:10:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from conrads@cox.net) Received: from eastrmfepo101.cox.net (eastrmfepo101.cox.net [68.230.241.213]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9E588FC18 for ; Fri, 9 Sep 2011 09:10:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eastrmimpo109.cox.net ([68.230.241.222]) by eastrmfepo101.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.01.04.00 201-2260-137-20101110) with ESMTP id <20110909091000.WBLO3821.eastrmfepo101.cox.net@eastrmimpo109.cox.net> for ; Fri, 9 Sep 2011 05:10:00 -0400 Received: from serene.no-ip.org ([172.18.52.4]) by eastrmimpo109.cox.net with bizsmtp id WZ8y1h00805SVJc02Z8yrC; Fri, 09 Sep 2011 05:08:59 -0400 X-CT-Class: Clean X-CT-Score: 0.00 X-CT-RefID: str=0001.0A020206.4E69D7E8.0112,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 X-CT-Spam: 0 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=dXu2k05gKT3VxFtG95YEdk9aq0n5a15ftWWFNKdz4Tg= c=1 sm=1 a=G8Uczd0VNMoA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=6I5d2MoRAAAA:8 a=kviXuzpPAAAA:8 a=udF4OF_nK8bnOvG88WQA:9 a=S3qVpGoctOsUrrQr1E0A:7 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=SV7veod9ZcQA:10 a=4vB-4DCPJfMA:10 a=UaX1woSWE4/tG05bAFg+xw==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Authentication-Results: cox.net; none Received: from cox.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by serene.no-ip.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id p8999xS4071631 for ; Fri, 9 Sep 2011 04:09:59 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from conrads@cox.net) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2011 04:09:54 -0500 From: "Conrad J. Sabatier" To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20110909040954.17733a4e@cox.net> In-Reply-To: <4E68F34C.6090504@FreeBSD.org> References: <4E651DCF.30605@FreeBSD.org> <201109052146.p85Lkous037023@fire.js.berklix.net> <4E67935C.6080702@aldan.algebra.com> <4E68AC85.4060705@icritical.com> <4E68F34C.6090504@FreeBSD.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.10 (GTK+ 2.24.6; amd64-portbld-freebsd9.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: sysutils/cfs X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 09:10:07 -0000 On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 18:54:36 +0200 Matthias Andree wrote: > Am 08.09.2011 13:52, schrieb Matt Burke: > > > I want machines, tools, to do as *I* say not the other way round, > > whether it's good for me or not. If I wanted nannying and > > interference, I'd install Ubuntu. > > No, you'd use a managed installation. Nobody stands there pointing a > gun at your head and forces you to uninstall a port that got removed > from the ports/ tree. If people could recognize that, it might help > get the derailed discussion back on the right track. You fail to take into account the case where a port may need to be reinstalled. An extraordinary effort is required if the port no longer exists in the ports tree. Frankly, I'm growing increasingly concerned that this push to eliminate ports is getting out of control. I don't much care for the notion that, having invested the time in installing, configuring and tuning a certain set of software packages, suddenly the rug could be pulled out from under me, so to speak, in essence *forcing* me to abandon using certain packages or else deal with maintaining them (in the ports maintainer sense) on my own. It feels like this latest ports collection cleanup effort most likely started with the best intentions, but is now fast becoming a runaway locomotive. Please, can we try to maintain the sanity and restraint that FreeBSD has always been known for? -- Conrad J. Sabatier conrads@cox.net