From owner-freebsd-questions Thu May 10 5:24:58 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from picard.skynet.be (picard.skynet.be [195.238.3.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C92BE37B422; Thu, 10 May 2001 05:24:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brad.knowles@skynet.be) Received: from [194.78.241.123] ([194.78.241.123]) by picard.skynet.be (8.11.2/8.11.2/Skynet-OUT-2.11) with ESMTP id f4ACOdO24363; Thu, 10 May 2001 14:24:39 +0200 (MET DST) (envelope-from ) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: bs663385@pop.skynet.be Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20010509180154.E17000@dell.dannyland.org> References: <20010509140838.C17000@dell.dannyland.org> <200105100026.RAA04754@usr06.primenet.com> <20010509180154.E17000@dell.dannyland.org> Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 14:23:22 +0200 To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, Terry Lambert From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: (long) upgrade kit for 3.x ports?! Cc: Joseph Mallett , freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, dannyman Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 6:01 PM -0700 5/9/01, dannyman wrote: > How convenient that the Postfix port does not go out of its way to remove > compatability logic explicitly added for what is by now an "unsupported" > version of FreeBSD, even though the ports tree REFUSES to be compatible with > said version of FreeBSD. Each port maintainer is free to make whatever changes they want in the way they support their port, and for which version of which OS. Just because the postfix port does something you do (or do not) like, does not mean that all the other 5000+ ports have to do (or must not do) the same. > , I have used bleeding-edge ports tree on truly ancient boxen for years. And they guy who had a German 75mm mortar shell left over from WWII and was using it as a sword sharpener every day for fifty-five years didn't have any problems, until the day it blew up on him. Just because you do something incredibly stupid and get away with it, doesn't mean that the thing isn't incredibly stupid to begin with. > I mean, 3.5 was released LESS THAN ONE YEAR AGO and now I am FORCED TO > UPGRADE if I want to install a single piece of software?! That strikes me as > pointlessly fascist. Repeat after me: Ports must be no later than OS. Ports must be no later than OS. Ports must be no later than OS. Now, if you want to upgrade your version of /usr/ports on a daily basis, I would suggest that you also upgrade the OS on a daily basis, so that they stay in sync. Otherwise, you get what you ask for. -- Brad Knowles, /* efdtt.c Author: Charles M. Hannum */ /* Represented as 1045 digit prime number by Phil Carmody */ /* Prime as DNS cname chain by Roy Arends and Walter Belgers */ /* */ /* Usage is: cat title-key scrambled.vob | efdtt >clear.vob */ /* where title-key = "153 2 8 105 225" or other similar 5-byte key */ dig decss.friet.org|perl -ne'if(/^x/){s/[x.]//g;print pack(H124,$_)}' To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message