Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 14:45:42 -0400 From: Sahil Tandon <sahil@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Cc: dinoex@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: How to handle upgrade of libnotify when cups-client-1.4.8 is marked as broken Message-ID: <20110828184542.GE277@magic.hamla.org> In-Reply-To: <20110828183300.GX17489@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> References: <4E5A48AC.6050201@eskk.nu> <20058.20743.791783.342355@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <BLU0-SMTP182102B9C96837517ECB6BB93150@phx.gbl> <20110828172651.GB277@magic.hamla.org> <20110828173059.GT17489@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20110828181356.GD277@magic.hamla.org> <20110828183300.GX17489@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 2011-08-28 at 21:33:00 +0300, Kostik Belousov wrote: > On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 02:13:59PM -0400, Sahil Tandon wrote: > > On Sun, 2011-08-28 at 20:30:59 +0300, Kostik Belousov wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 01:26:51PM -0400, Sahil Tandon wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2011-08-28 at 11:30:27 -0400, Carmel wrote: > > > > > > > > > My question is what changed? It worked before updating "libnotify". Is > > > > > "libnotify" the culprit or "GNUTLS" or something else and why didn't > > > > > anyone catch this problem sooner? > > > > > > > > The chain of dependencies during the libnotify update prompted the > > > > upgrade of cups. The latter's OpenSSL interfaces are explicitly > > > > thread-safe, which GNU TLS is not. > > > > > > > > > There appears to be a lot of material released lately that is either > > > > > broken or requiring a considerable amount of manual intervention. > > > > > Perhaps a moratorium (port freeze) should be considered until all of > > > > > the outstanding problems have been corrected. > > > > > > > > We are sorry for the inconvenience which is surely frustrating, but > > > > freezing the tree because of this does not seem appropriate. > > > > > > Might be, completely ignoring the option 'use gnutls' in cups ports, > > > until it can be made working, will change everybody life to be easier. > > > > What "might be"? > > > > As already noted, the GNUTLS option now defaults to OFF and users are > > warned (via the BROKEN construct) if it is selected. > > Apparently, this have to be written explicitely. Users, who upgrade > their ports, are not presented with the configuration dialog. Using > automated tool like portupgrade, all you get is a list of the failed > ports. After that, user needs to start investigation, spending his > own time and possibly time of the people on list. > > Ignoring or removing the option makes the ports upgrade without user > intervention. I am sorry users have had to "intervene" in managing their systems, but rather than removing the option entirely, I prefer mandree@'s more structural suggestion of re-prompting the user when defaults change. In the meantime, a note in UPDATING about explicitly disabling the GNUTLS option for cups ports is probably appropriate. I have copied the maintainer in hopes that he will consider it. > I am willing to spend some more time describing unobvious points of > this consideration. No, the consideration is trivial and does not need explaining; I just had trouble parsing your English. -- Sahil Tandon <sahil@FreeBSD.org>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110828184542.GE277>