From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 12 09:47:13 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD6B1106566C for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 09:47:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hm@hm.net.br) Received: from msrv.matik.com.br (msrv.matik.com.br [187.95.0.181]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 432B08FC0C for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 09:47:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pop1.hm.net.br (pop1.hm.net.br [189.7.36.48]) (authenticated bits=0) by msrv.matik.com.br (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q5C9l0QJ072084 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 12 Jun 2012 06:47:00 -0300 (BRT) (envelope-from hm@hm.net.br) X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.97.4 at msrv.matik.com.br X-DKIM: OpenDKIM Filter v2.5.2 msrv.matik.com.br q5C9l0QJ072084 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=hm.net.br; s=racoon; t=1339494421; bh=80vRsb6YwefbyBI/VLli1KEDoaHwwC17Ll8hjW9UhlY=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Cc:References:In-Reply-To; b=MN0/dMzROAQwcrfWcD817eRN+edelF5crq9dGPFEPHYiCm3/QhFv3IDoTTtS+0IiM ZyNz3abqkQqnOP4xErqoMIAnTi8BgVMnuNK5+YPueFTKg1rKf6l/4oT5LadiBE8D0S HcM1+Fte8R4Yraoh5+eMJ+qEz/ujXqbBANUGUWOQ= Authentication-Results: msrv.matik.com.br; sender-id=pass header.from=hm@hm.net.br; auth=pass (PLAIN); spf=pass smtp.mfrom=hm@hm.net.br From: H Organization: HM-Net To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 06:46:52 -0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (FreeBSD/9.0-STABLE; KDE/4.8.3; i386; ; ) References: <201206112335.q5BNZGPT029709@hugeraid.jetcafe.org> <7B6E5361-B109-498E-B22F-96A94DEC371B@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <7B6E5361-B109-498E-B22F-96A94DEC371B@mac.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart10070759.uoyylTscIr"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201206120646.59491.hm@hm.net.br> X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL=0.701,BAYES_00=-1.9,DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,DKIM_VALID=-0.1,DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1,RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT=1.449,RCVD_IN_PBL=3.335,SPF_PASS=-0.001,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 msrv.matik.com.br 1102; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 [127.0.0.11] [1 mail.matik.com.br.] [127.0.0.2] [187.95.0.182] autolearn=no ASN AS28573 189.7.36.0/22 X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2-hm_201202.c (2011-06-06) on msrv.matik.com.br Cc: Subject: Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 09:47:13 -0000 --nextPart10070759.uoyylTscIr Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Monday 11 June 2012 20:59 Chuck Swiger wrote: > Hi, Dave-- >=20 > On Jun 11, 2012, at 4:35 PM, Dave Hayes wrote: > [ ... ] >=20 > > Do I have this wrong? Anyone see a problem with this picture? > > What can we do to "just upgrade" in a safe fashion when we want to? >=20 > Two things help tremendously: >=20 > #1: Have working backups. If you run into a problem, roll back the > system to a working state. If you cannot restore a working system > easily, fix your backup solution until you can rollback easily. >=20 > #2: Have a package-building box and test builds before installing > new package builds to other boxes. Your downtime for upgrades > to the rest of your boxes become minimized. >=20 > Regards, of course it helps ... but please do not forget that most people just want their desktop up to dat= e=20 and have a working kde (or any other) environment I believe the ports tree simply must? should? be seen as it is, partially g= ood=20 working, and partially a jorney to very dark places , depends on which port= s=20 and how many you have installed=20 in any case it is for somebody who knows what he does and can find his way = out,=20 or is courageous, a "normal desktop user" probably is not able to upgrade k= de4=20 properly and ends up with an unusable machine On Monday 11 June 2012 20:20 Dave Hayes wrote: > Rainer Duffner writes: > > Sometimes, options only make sense in context of the selection of > > options of other ports and it thus may no be easily explainable in one > > line. >=20 > I don't understand Are you saying this is a reason not to document what > these options do? both here deepen the "lead into the dark" theory On Sunday 10 June 2012 14:10 O. Hartmann wrote: > "portmaster" does even more damage. Sometimed a port reels in some newly > updates, a port gets deleted. if on of the to be updated prerquisits > fail, the port in question isn't there anymore. this is caused of ports tree's install script maior logic failure, BTW by=20 portmaster AND portupgrade and it happens quite often,=20 as already commented, nobody sits in front of the screen and watch the comp= ile=20 process so this problems go under at first sight I think, correcting this, would help a lot and may solve a lot of existing= =20 [hidden] problems.=20 I see only one way, having a complete package collection for easy upgrade most of you do not like it, but you must look at the competitors, Fedoras=20 upgrade system works, user do not need the newest features and none of them= =20 are essential for a desktop to work properly of course the package collection needs then something similar to portversio= n,=20 but not based on ports tree versions, in order to find available updates who then wants to customize or learn or who dares, can use the ports tree after all I guess any further effort on ports goes nowhere because it depen= ds=20 at the end on the maintainer and/or committer and people use to fail, that = is=20 so and nobody can change that.=20 Of course It would be nice to find this "eval" behaviour of deleting=20 accidentially installed ports corrected what is worth working on is a complete package collection and a propper upd= ate=20 tool for it Hans --nextPart10070759.uoyylTscIr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iEYEABECAAYFAk/XEBMACgkQvKVfg5xjCDxjHwCdHqJtEJ/km6GULVhB2dWT/y/q cToAn3xcXUS+MqfGH5JWf1qkUxvYDdBo =IFu5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart10070759.uoyylTscIr--