Date: Sat, 2 Aug 1997 02:27:25 -0700 (PDT) From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) To: andreas@klemm.gtn.com Cc: ports@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org, stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports-current/packages-current discontinued Message-ID: <199708020927.CAA11125@blimp.mimi.com> In-Reply-To: <19970801182448.26268@klemm.gtn.com> (message from Andreas Klemm on Fri, 1 Aug 1997 18:24:48 %2B0200)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* But unable to build really working 2.2 packages, because they
* only have -current :-/
Well, I'll be doing thot from now on. Watch packages-stable on your
nearest mirror site -- other than building packages for new/upgraded
ports, I've been recompiling the entire tree every month or so, and
that will still continue after switching to -stable.
* Well, wouldn't it make more sense to discuss, to back out the
* changes that introduces these problems ?
You are absolutely right.
* Why was TCL not brought into the ports collection ???
* We already have several TCL versions there for backward
* compatibility ... why not put the newest stuff into there
* with respect to the problems. that now arise ?
Beats me. ;)
* Wouln't it be better to come to a decision, that such
* things like perl and tcl, _if_ they are needed in the
* base system, should be of the same version in -current
* and -stable ?!
That's a big "if" there. I think the latest incident are making many
people wonder "is it really worth having tcl in the base tree?".
The problem with tcl is that it changes too much and often new
versions are not backwards compatible with the old ones. It's not
much of a problem if it isn't such an essential part of the FreeBSD
environment -- but it is, and there are so many ports that depend on a
particular version of tcl, it is simply too much of a pain to have
"the" version in the base system yank the ports around every time it
is upgraded. (The last non-continuation occurred between tcl73/tk36
and tcl74/tk40 -- but at that time, tcl was not part of the base
tree so we could deal with it entirely in the ports side.)
There are only two ways out of this, as far as I can tell; remove tcl
from the base system (pst has done most of the work for this), or
completely ignore the one in the base system and always use tcl from
the ports collection (I'm not sure how hard this is -- we may need an
enhanced version of LIB_DEPENDS or something).
* Ports should at least run with -STABLE and -CURRENT. I only run
Absolutely. I (and many others) have spend much time and effort on
this; I would like to continue doing so.
Satoshi
P.S. By the way, every single one of the packages (that worked for
-current) still compiled cleanly after I switched to -stable; the
only ones that broke since my last -current build (about two
weeks ago) was tk41 (broken by half-baked upgrade/switch of
dependency, since fixed) and tclX75 (broken by tk41, haven't
figured this one out yet).
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199708020927.CAA11125>