From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 6 14:15:56 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 508371065672 for ; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 14:15:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from utisoft@gmail.com) Received: from mail-bk0-f54.google.com (mail-bk0-f54.google.com [209.85.214.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF1678FC1A for ; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 14:15:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bkvi18 with SMTP id i18so7326850bkv.13 for ; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 07:15:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=GSwGs47tYfKf8xei3cWuVD6yPmFZoEL74KIzdTJryek=; b=gKWv/XCiLWMxK1eXQ2r/2p1sSsmRG5BtOB3hXCPVGifwEZfXhGqS+aydbMqfc4cTDe 1R6xdLmlIH/A0JHjqozXFeKYnAx18KSkTVA+SPXAQVahXl6s83jHIvV9qlxxq06gsyUg Ch872Z+swNJmxYwhiioSos8uPZPqZTEcCXW+EyIoU5lVPNu63P694JaTK+N47blt0GEq P/LLTikQ0RQZpk2/gs2SgHMz5R4Vsqg3GBt7lY+TprtvKm6Kj9gEScbsuEBcOZWahXf2 sGSExMUUo0U6r1kEzeqR/m3PAksw7b+KG1zecUvwybcA8wQ4cISEfcx4emm2T/z70J0K Y5jg== Received: by 10.205.33.136 with SMTP id so8mr12083599bkb.1.1338992154657; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 07:15:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: utisoft@gmail.com Received: by 10.204.171.138 with HTTP; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 07:15:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <3668749.rHy9RI2eRn@x220.ovitrap.com> References: <4FCEFCBE.4050401@digsys.bg> <3668749.rHy9RI2eRn@x220.ovitrap.com> From: Chris Rees Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 15:15:24 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: gmF_7h6yF5q7yJgiuRaDDK9hKNM Message-ID: To: Erich Dollansky Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Sean Cavanaugh , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Daniel Kalchev Subject: Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 14:15:56 -0000 On 6 June 2012 14:48, Erich Dollansky wrote: > Hi, > > On 06 June 2012 9:21:22 Sean Cavanaugh wrote: >> >> Overall I see it as packages are flat stable at the cost of being out of >> date, and ports are current but not guaranteed to compile without >> intervention. The Maintainers do give a very good shot to make them stable >> but sometimes one person cannot maintain millions of lines of code and not >> make a glitch occasionally, or make it out on time when a dependency >> changes. > > isn't the date of the packages the date of the last release of the branch? Aren't the chances high then to get a working ports tree? > > You can follow the discussion about this subject for at least 10 years back. The result is always the same. > > In parallel is the discussion why so little people are using FreeBSD. > > Do you understand what I want to say? I do understand it, but you don't seem to understand that we *do* understand what you're saying. - Tagged ports trees contain out of date software. - Security fixes cannot be backported to tagged trees- we *do* *not* *have* *resources* for this. - Occasionally you may see minor issues when following the latest branch of ports. This is the price you pay for being up to date, with the very latest of software. Chris