Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 15:18:26 +0200 From: David Demelier <markand@malikania.fr> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ffmpeg port Message-ID: <95f2326f-8431-804d-1439-40dbc28f71a0@malikania.fr> In-Reply-To: <1ryy-rtgr-wny@FreeBSD.org> References: <2288dfa5-0ec0-d1f5-eeca-066260604c22@aventia.pw> <1ryy-rtgr-wny@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Le 10/07/2019 à 13:59, Jan Beich a écrit : > Why not use binary packages? Or why not build a quarterly branch? > Or does anyone have better ideas? Unfortunately quarterly branches do not solve anything. They are just to short to have any benefit. Let say you build a package in January and then you don't touch your system for a while. In September, you realize you need another port but your local ports also have vulnerabilities. Now you have to update by changing the quarterly branch since others are no longer maintained. Then, you may have some local ports that will be upgraded to a major version which can be undesired for a production server. This happened to me a while ago when I had to run an old version of nodejs for an old version of etherpad, after an upgrade the new nodejs version was no longer compatible and I needed to install node6 port quickly (hopefully it was available !). This can be very frustrating since FreeBSD is a rock solid server OS that comes with strong compatibility conventions in releases versions but provides a ports tree in a rolling release fashion that do not match the base version (unlike OpenBSD does). Then you have to carefully check each time you need to update your ports that you won't break your system (like many do with Arch, Gentoo, etc). IMHO, FreeBSD definitely requires a per-RELEASE branches of ports that contain only bugfixes/security fixes. -- David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?95f2326f-8431-804d-1439-40dbc28f71a0>