From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org  Thu Feb  9 16:26:01 2017
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
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 4B6D1CD8BB3
 for <freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Thu,  9 Feb 2017 16:26:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pi@opsec.eu)
Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38DC111E1
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Thu,  9 Feb 2017 16:26:01 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from pi@opsec.eu)
Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix)
 id 38432CD8BB2; Thu,  9 Feb 2017 16:26:01 +0000 (UTC)
Delivered-To: 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 37F0FCD8BB1
 for <ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>; Thu,  9 Feb 2017 16:26:01 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from pi@opsec.eu)
Received: from home.opsec.eu (home.opsec.eu [IPv6:2001:14f8:200::1])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE3FB11E0
 for <ports@freebsd.org>; Thu,  9 Feb 2017 16:26:00 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from pi@opsec.eu)
Received: from pi by home.opsec.eu with local (Exim 4.87 (FreeBSD))
 (envelope-from <pi@opsec.eu>)
 id 1cbrXk-000AIt-VW; Thu, 09 Feb 2017 17:26:01 +0100
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 17:26:00 +0100
From: Kurt Jaeger <pi@opsec.eu>
To: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>
Cc: freebsd-ports <ports@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Install of pkg fuse-ntfs fails because of undefined symbol in
 pkg!?!
Message-ID: <20170209162600.GP13006@home.opsec.eu>
References: <dvvl9chf9h22dpjto35d44enid819p9rnc@4ax.com>
 <h91m9cpbmp6js1km1bson74he5uuui9r6h@4ax.com>
 <1c6cccac-b151-d13c-c763-b336c4680118@freebsd.org>
 <ndjm9cl4samqgioi25ro8p2q6liimvr1h4@4ax.com>
 <35a953e3-918b-fc32-d990-51f7da16c884@FreeBSD.org>
 <AE0D514C-D235-462D-B31D-66FC619D9F4D@lastsummer.de>
 <20170209161249.GL2092@kib.kiev.ua>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170209161249.GL2092@kib.kiev.ua>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2017 16:26:01 -0000

Hi!

> On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 04:30:20PM +0100, Franco Fichtner wrote:
> > FreeBSD package management makes an ABI promise in the form of
> > "FreeBSD:10:amd64", but not even pkg code itself adheres to this,
> > and thus we have had subtle and yet fatal breakage in 10.2 and 10.3.
> Stop spreading FUD. There is no ABI breakage on stable/10 branch,
> nor there is a breakage in the package sets.

On the one hand:

Maybe we can agree that the pkg binary breaking between different
10.x versions was unfortunate ? I understand that it was not a
break of the ABI promises per se, but I can tell you, I was surprised
as well, when it bite me 8-}

On the other hand:

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...

-- 
pi@opsec.eu            +49 171 3101372                         3 years to go !