Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 22:29:36 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Roelof Osinga <roelof@eboa.com> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: What gives? Message-ID: <20010510222936.A15908@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <3AFB3C14.A6FB45AA@eboa.com>; from roelof@eboa.com on Fri, May 11, 2001 at 03:10:44AM %2B0200 References: <3AF9F4E8.52A31C48@eboa.com> <20010510050737.A2285@xor.obsecurity.org> <3AFB3C14.A6FB45AA@eboa.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 03:10:44AM +0200, Roelof Osinga wrote:
> >> Checksum mismatch for xemacs/dired-1.09-pkg.tar.gz.
This file is corrupt or out of date. Re-fetch it.
> > Not enough manpower, and it still wouldn't help if you screw up a
> > ports-stable upgrade like you apparently did with your ports upgrade.
>=20
> That's a different discussion entirely. Usually it starts with RTFM.
> To which I would answer but I did RTFM!
>=20
> But now you're saying well... if it did not work then you did something
> wrong. Period.
It's usually the case. You haven't demonstrated any problems so far
which would be solved by a "ports-stable". For example, you would
still have had the xemacs21 problem your described in this email,
because it's not a problem with the xemacs21 port, but a problem with
the distfile you fetched for it.
> The lack of manpower I dig. No argument there.
>=20
> But that does not mean it's fine to release ports that will or even
> can not install. Again, it's not like it's very bleak but it sure does
> feel like it is happening more regurarly recently than it did in the
> (near) past. Feels bad to me.
There's nothing wrong with the xemacs21 port. You could go and fetch
the package to prove this (if the port was broken, the package
wouldn't build).
> > > So what stability does Micro-Soft has that FreeBSD hasn't?
> >=20
> > Specious question, doesn't need an answer.
>=20
> A specious answer, did you really mean to say I'm a show off? Flippant
> I could've conde, yet specious... Nah.
Specious \Spe"cious\, a.=20
2. Apparently right; superficially fair, just, or correct,
but not so in reality; appearing well at first view;
plausible; as, specious reasoning; a specious argument.
Your assertion that the FreeBSD Ports Collection is somehow as badly
broken as Microsoft products may have seemed jusitifed to you, but it
is based on flawed reasoning and is not supported by the evidence you
have presented to support your conclusion.
Kris
--ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.5 (FreeBSD)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE6+3i/Wry0BWjoQKURAsozAKDoYy/U4SE03WuLvXTyWjpzkQfl0ACgiMsh
b0IMgRMX5xH6zxnaX0CUcDA=
=YQ2G
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH--
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010510222936.A15908>