From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Thu May 31 14:29:16 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98DADFD330F for ; Thu, 31 May 2018 14:29:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from deischen@freebsd.org) Received: from mail.netplex.net (mail.netplex.net [204.213.176.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.netplex.net", Issuer "RapidSSL RSA CA 2018" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B7186882A for ; Thu, 31 May 2018 14:29:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from deischen@freebsd.org) Received: from sea.ntplx.net (sea.ntplx.net [204.213.176.11]) by mail.netplex.net (8.15.1/8.15.1/NETPLEX) with ESMTP id w4VENX3A023944; Thu, 31 May 2018 10:23:33 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS and Clam AntiVirus (mail.netplex.net) X-Greylist: Message whitelisted by DRAC access database, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (mail.netplex.net [204.213.176.9]); Thu, 31 May 2018 10:23:34 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 10:23:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen X-X-Sender: eischen@sea.ntplx.net Reply-To: Daniel Eischen To: Konstantin Belousov cc: Johannes Lundberg , freebsd-current Subject: Re: [RFC] Deprecation and removal of the drm2 driver In-Reply-To: <20180531101643.GV3789@kib.kiev.ua> Message-ID: References: <20180524160234.GD68014@FreeBSD.org> <201805241610.w4OGAAGY041280@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> <20180530235156.310870d0@thor.intern.walstatt.dynvpn.de> <20180531101643.GV3789@kib.kiev.ua> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 14:29:16 -0000 On Thu, 31 May 2018, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 08:34:44AM +0100, Johannes Lundberg wrote: > >> We're not replacing anything. We are moving the older drm1 and drm2 from >> kernel to ports to make it easier for the majority of the users to load the >> correct driver without conflicts. > > You do understand that you increase your maintainence load by this move. > dev/drm and dev/drm2 use KPIs which cannot be kept stable even in stable > branches, so you will need to chase these updates. I agree. One argument previously made was that it's easier to maintain in ports. One data point from me - I rarely update my ports, I update my OS much more frequently. In fact, some times my ports get so out of date I just (take off and) nuke /usr/local (from orbit, it's the only way to be sure). Also, are we trying to solve a problem by moving drm[2] to ports that won't be a problem when base is pkg'ized? If drm[2] is a package unto itself, then you don't have this problem of ports conflicting with it, at least not so much. You can either not install the base drm[2] package or deinstall it to make way for a conflicting port. Once drm[2] is pkg rm'd, it's not going to be reinstalled again when you update the base OS. And don't we have the same problem with sendmail and a few other base services? -- DE