From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Fri Feb 10 16:46:18 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 332D5CD9508 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 16:46:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@opsec.eu) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FF717D6 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 16:46:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@opsec.eu) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 1F597CD9507; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 16:46:18 +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 1F099CD9506 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 16:46:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@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 D37DB7D5 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 16:46:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@opsec.eu) Received: from pi by home.opsec.eu with local (Exim 4.87 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ccEKt-000LU6-UL; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 17:46:15 +0100 Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 17:46:15 +0100 From: Kurt Jaeger To: scratch65535@att.net Cc: freebsd-ports Subject: Re: Install of pkg fuse-ntfs fails because of undefined symbol in pkg!?! Message-ID: <20170210164615.GQ13006@home.opsec.eu> References: <1c6cccac-b151-d13c-c763-b336c4680118@freebsd.org> <35a953e3-918b-fc32-d990-51f7da16c884@FreeBSD.org> <20170209161249.GL2092@kib.kiev.ua> <20170209162600.GP13006@home.opsec.eu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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 16:46:18 -0000 Hi! > On Thu, 9 Feb 2017 17:26:00 +0100, Kurt Jaeger wrote > >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... > > But it's the velocity that's the problem, Kurt. While I very much sympathize with "The world rotates too fast, I want to get off", for me it looks like as a project we do not have alternatives. > Do you know of anyone who has successfully defended, or even > tried to defend, the current manic pace of revision and > obsoleting? Is it defense, if we see many projects (open source etc) shorten their cycle time (e.g. php7), because they see the need to add features or patch security issues (and breaks APIs/ABIs doing either) ? And if we try to keep up and for this, if we add features to the ports framework ? I'm doing this (application mgmt on unix systems) for a long time now, a quarter of a century, and I see no viable alternative in the problem space we work in. I also see that this very fast speed uses up huge amounts of person power and compute resources (all those folks rebuilding many ports in their build hosts). But it's not easy to stop off this planet 8-} -- pi@opsec.eu +49 171 3101372 3 years to go !