From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 9 17:05:53 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 ECD611065672 for ; Fri, 9 Sep 2011 17:05:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from matthias.andree@gmx.de) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1F7518FC14 for ; Fri, 9 Sep 2011 17:05:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 09 Sep 2011 17:05:51 -0000 Received: from g225207059.adsl.alicedsl.de (EHLO apollo.emma.line.org) [92.225.207.59] by mail.gmx.net (mp044) with SMTP; 09 Sep 2011 19:05:51 +0200 X-Authenticated: #428038 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/Rqeo9Wi3RhYWu1rudX5bqJ9G8w3FeAmRYcCx6Z8 +rrYA8q03LjxSP Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by apollo.emma.line.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C927623D34D for ; Fri, 9 Sep 2011 19:05:49 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E6A476D.7090800@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 19:05:49 +0200 From: Matthias Andree User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.21) Gecko/20110831 Mnenhy/0.8.3 Thunderbird/3.1.13 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-ports@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> <20110909040954.17733a4e@cox.net> In-Reply-To: <20110909040954.17733a4e@cox.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 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 17:05:54 -0000 Am 09.09.2011 11:09, schrieb Conrad J. Sabatier: > 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. If a "port may need to be reinstalled" then you failed organize proper backups. Not a valid point here. > 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. The rug is pulled by the upstream maintainers abandoning their software, not by FreeBSD no longer packaging it years after the fact.