From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Sun Feb 12 21:56:38 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 83F2FCDCCFA for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 21:56:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portmaster@bsdforge.com) Received: from udns.ultimatedns.net (static-24-113-41-81.wavecable.com [24.113.41.81]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6837B10E4 for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 21:56:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from portmaster@bsdforge.com) Received: from ultimatedns.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by udns.ultimatedns.net (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id v1CLi4Kp027264 for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 13:44:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from portmaster@bsdforge.com) To: In-Reply-To: References: <1c6cccac-b151-d13c-c763-b336c4680118@freebsd.org> <35a953e3-918b-fc32-d990-51f7da16c884@FreeBSD.org> <20170209161249.GL2092@kib.kiev.ua> <20170209162600.GP13006@home.opsec.eu> <20170210164615.GQ13006@home.opsec.eu>, From: "C Hutchinson" Subject: Re: Install of pkg fuse-ntfs fails because of undefined symbol in pkg!?! Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2017 13:44:10 -0800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=fixed MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-id: <5be4963b058a6200d3d817cbe7142540@ultimatedns.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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: Sun, 12 Feb 2017 21:56:38 -0000 On Sat, 11 Feb 2017 07:31:10 -0500 wrote > On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 17:46:15 +0100, Kurt Jaeger > wrote: > > >Hi! > > Moin! > > > > >> On Thu, 9 Feb 2017 17:26:00 +0100, Kurt Jaeger wrote > >> >Getting the ports/pkg tree moving with the velocity necessary > >> >to cope with the fast-changing world, sometimes things break > >> >and we all try to prevent this. Sometimes, mistakes happen... > >> > >> But it's the velocity that's the problem, Kurt. > > > >While I very much sympathize with "The world rotates too fast, > >I want to get off", for me it looks like as a project we do > >not have alternatives. > > Why not? What would happen to fBSD that's not already happening? > Why aren't people asking what's going on and how to turn it > around? Could it be because they're too busy being busy? > > There's a well-known problem that kills ground-attack pilots all > the time (or it used to; maybe they have safety features built > into the aircraft now). They become fixated on their target, and > they bring the nose of their aircraft further and further down to > keep the target in their sights. Which causes them to fly right > into the ground! > > Fixation is a problem in other fields, too. > > > > >> Do you know of anyone who has successfully defended, or even > >> tried to defend, the current manic pace of revision and > >> obsoleting? > > > >Is it defense, if we see many projects (open source etc) > >shorten their cycle time (e.g. php7), because they see the need to > >add features or patch security issues (and breaks APIs/ABIs doing either) ? > > It seems more like an excuse than a defence, to me. Is it > pushing Linux back? If not, what *would* push Linux back? Why > is Linux so successful even though fBSD is older and better, and > was once completely dominant in the space? What are the Linux > projects doing that we're not? > > > > >And if we try to keep up and for this, if we add features to the > >ports framework ? I'm doing this (application mgmt on unix systems) > >for a long time now, a quarter of a century, and I see no viable > >alternative in the problem space we work in. > > I trained as a clinical psychologist, not in computer science or > ee. We learned that adults are notoriously resistant to change This is a very astute observation. One I recognized as an absolute; some two and a half decades ago, myself. Well done! > (not that we hadn't noticed that ourselves, most of us, but it > was nice to have it confirmed "officially"). > > But change is possible, even for adults. The key to change is to > realise, at the gut level, that change *is* possible, that things > need *not* always be as they are now. That life really truly > can be better. > > That's really hard for most adults to believe. The prospect of > change is terrifying because it threatens us with loss of > control. The largest fail in recent history, in this regard was pkg(8). Not that pkg itself is bad, per se; but in the way it was "presented". Or rather "dropped" like a bomb. Without having been "vetted" prior, by those that would now be /required/ to use it -- not an option. The "magic bullet" is when the "change" is perceived as being a change they "wanted", or "asked for". FreeBSD has seen *many* requests for change(s) over the years. Most of which are dismissed, ignored, or outright rejected. Even tho many were variations of the same. Solution? /Listen/ to those requests. Perform a pattern match to discover similarities in requests, and propose what could be perceived "feasible" implementations of those requests. Then implement them, and you'll gain a enthusiastic following. Period. > > But we don't have to lose control. We can change a bit at a > time, staying in control all the while. All we need is the will > to do it. (The world is in the mess it's in because, it seems, > most of those who have the will to change use it for malignant > purposes --the last several US presidents being cases in point) > > > > >I also see that this very fast speed uses up huge amounts of > >person power and compute resources (all those folks rebuilding > >many ports in their build hosts). But it's not easy to stop off > >this planet 8-} > > I would never urge that we jump off the planet. It'd be too hard > to breathe outside the atmospheric envelope. :-) > > But that doesn't mean we're currently doing the right things to > regain share from Linux and save FreeBSD. This is NOT, nor has never has been a "Linux vs BSD" thing. Linux is not UNIX. Ahem... Let me rephrase that; This is NOT a Linux vs BSD thing, anymore than a Windows vs BSD thing. This is an "Operating System of choice" thing. If your OS provides what a majority of what people need, and want; you're successful, and popular. It's as simple as that. That's all I have to say in this matter. I generally shy away from such discussions. As history proves that they devolve into a "bikeshed(tm)" -- PHK. Over, and out. --Chris