From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Fri Feb 10 13:21:02 2017 Return-Path: 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 22674CD6F7F for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 13:21:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scratch65535@att.net) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 041E1793 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 13:21:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scratch65535@att.net) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 007C5CD6F7E; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 13:21:02 +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 0022BCD6F7D for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 13:21:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scratch65535@att.net) Received: from nm10-vm6.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (nm10-vm6.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [216.39.63.158]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACA3D792 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 13:21:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scratch65535@att.net) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=att.net; s=s1024; t=1486732650; bh=aCkzqcn09cZUwlTu4eXQ3WwVX3SvRJbiMceFrNDE/14=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From:Subject; b=1zB87jj3DaBTiq3Wa9UXYxEkuUxDSu6SZKZVMDNtxacFBXtOzJQJGH/mWEnMQNHNTvj/a+d1Gq63dj4WPwRfhQ9NScRgyybM+86eyhn3w9peBz53Ft70MtDMGANQzvWvgh8YU1OoFshW71u7/KuHSqmnhv2SWow/MHDYJbRfVnQ= Received: from [216.39.60.173] by nm10.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 10 Feb 2017 13:17:30 -0000 Received: from [67.195.23.144] by tm9.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 10 Feb 2017 13:17:30 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp116.sbc.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 10 Feb 2017 13:17:30 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 93585.92771.bm@smtp116.sbc.mail.gq1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: hkPJPZEVM1lw1efFWobXal3QnaVuUVRR3WfPh_28Lmpkq.d WS.vf..hFZy6Qh5WcQwkf92NMfTj91DqhnEzK0H1G0YAywpQq6rqK87cPqRL f3lN3RJe3khn97tLny7nmQEa7wEmd2Xv8VsfJJfyKNM9N4tLnZs.lWv4B_nF _ekCrpo4VezS1jevM08dPedJ2fEJNSL06bKbU06octr3VzIbps_OL..uN2Zm 7JT7pXK.Zuzy_WP66l22D0CSR0u0rJgvxMJtd1xiBcsCc05.2w2BrY3WjHMT IociQ25dqObDKUhegCOHyyAWq4.xqzZW1U3i2NVN7ZdwVjvt2Z3cJVsNxuNW UKvU._bfsjnWPZr4oCuHRD55Jsnce8cCeb3N86uFFHcy5sOu_5e3qt6KHbSH kUxnrFnwDO.SGWH0jtsFIRsXYdlr5it8J8P6SyXLSGWGDTW.5Z8UHKDN0Uos sn9FHcACgfcTgAFGHPcUvNGs_YEjnt0C8QYXkne_kuqNjpF6I6QQjjctzGU3 QmHKwSYlhN5f1NhrUOEqHFi89nKb6jU2T0g_f1dOo.oqNJFXtVGgr5b8wBWc RruMKcqzXWjB7yFj_4RrICg-- X-Yahoo-SMTP: pPvqnOaswBBbYZLVYFzvU7GaowLcbNioPp.aF8KvOjZk From: To: freebsd-ports Subject: Re: Install of pkg fuse-ntfs fails because of undefined symbol in pkg!?! Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 08:17:31 -0500 Message-ID: <99cr9cp6o01ef949dig289bkspipl8mog7@4ax.com> References: <1c6cccac-b151-d13c-c763-b336c4680118@freebsd.org> <35a953e3-918b-fc32-d990-51f7da16c884@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <35a953e3-918b-fc32-d990-51f7da16c884@FreeBSD.org> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 13:21:02 -0000 On Thu, 9 Feb 2017 10:09:35 -0500, Steve Wills wrote: >Hi, > >On 02/08/2017 12:34, scratch65535@att.net wrote: >> >> I *did* check for bug reports. I did a search on "utimenstat" >> and found exactly one, which had been withdrawn as not being a >> bug. >> >> But it *is* a bug. It's a bug on several levels, the most >> significant of which is that the overly frantic schedule makes >> versions have the lifespan of a mayfly. And we're told "just >> upgrade", as though there's some physical law mandating the >> craziness. > >Ports and packages are maintained on the assumption that the user is >using a supported version of the OS. We didn't decide when to end >support for 10.1 or 10.2. How long after the end of life for 10.1 would >you have ports maintain support? A good rule of thumb from industry in the case of major software would be "forever", meaning until it's very unlikely that anyone is still using it because of hardware obsolescence, etc. "Support" for out-of-rev software need be no more than disc space, if that's all that can be afforded. I'd have been happy to get that package I thought I would get--it never occurred to me that the packages for 10.2 would all be summarily purged! > >> There are people for whom the system is a tool, not a hobby. They >> don't want to have to rebuild their tools any more than >> carpenters want to replace their hammers and levels every year or >> two. > >If you've having trouble upgrading that are causing you to rebuild, then >that's a different issue, but not one I can help with. It doesn't change >the fact that we don't support unsupported versions of the OS. But the transition to "unsupported" is not a function of physical law. It's a human choice, and can be revisited any time people are willing to do so. Why is Linux able to so easily replace FreeBSD? The desktop is gone. Servers are going. The new AMD chips are being tested against Intel on Linux boxes, not FreeBSD boxes. FreeBSD is being made obsolete. This not happening by accident. And it won't stop by itself. > >> For those people (I'm one) long version lifespans and bug-free >> operation is a much bigger desideratum than winning the secret >> race (I presume there is some kind of secret race going on, since >> otherwise the crazy scheduling makes No Sense At All). I can't >> work out what the strategy for winning is, if there is a >> strategy, but I do know that it's not working. Linux has all >> but won already, and that's sickening. > >Ports are maintained by volunteers. If you would like to volunteer to >support branches for longer periods of time, let's talk about that. I'm a customer. I'm one of the people for whom the dev and porting work is supposedly being done. The problem is the lunatic turnover rate. It prevents things from being done in any kind of measured way. It's all firefighting, all the time. That guarantees that things fall through the cracks, tempers get short, and people burn out. Who benefits? > >> I've been using the o/s since before v2 (I still have the cds) >> and have watched FreeBSD go from being the leading Unix on Intel >> boxes to all-but-dead. I don't know how to express how saddened >> I feel about that. > >I think ports are really improving and the rate of improvement is going up. Then why is Linux everywhere and fBSD is circling the drain?