From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Apr 20 12:21:18 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 0171ED46E62 for ; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 12:21:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 000.fbsd@quip.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (elsa.codelab.cz [94.124.105.4]) (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 B5FC414F; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 12:21:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 000.fbsd@quip.cz) Received: from elsa.codelab.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92901284AA; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 14:21:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from illbsd.quip.test (ip-86-49-16-209.net.upcbroadband.cz [86.49.16.209]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by elsa.codelab.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D5384284A7; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 14:21:13 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: Is pkg quarterly really needed? To: Mathieu Arnold , Julian Elischer , Torfinn Ingolfsen , FreeBSD Ports ML References: <58F61A8D.1030309@a1poweruser.com> <68ad0daa-b1f5-f3a6-f056-dcf2f0047d94@freebsd.org> <20170420060017.GG74780@home.opsec.eu> <92d4387e-4515-6e11-1e7f-5cc008eab836@freebsd.org> <360ca352-8b8f-ef4e-f92b-99e72a6ba918@FreeBSD.org> From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> Message-ID: <58F8A7B9.6060607@quip.cz> Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 14:21:13 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/42.0 SeaMonkey/2.39 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <360ca352-8b8f-ef4e-f92b-99e72a6ba918@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 12:21:18 -0000 Mathieu Arnold wrote on 2017/04/20 13:29: > Le 20/04/2017 à 13:04, Julian Elischer a écrit : >> On 20/4/17 5:15 pm, Mathieu Arnold wrote: >>> Le 20/04/2017 à 10:49, Torfinn Ingolfsen a écrit : >>> I am not exactly sure what you are asking for, to keep the previous, not >>> updated, quarterly package repositories ? say, in latest-1 latest-2 >>> latest-3... ? >>> >>> >>> What purpose would that serve ? I mean, they would not be updated. >> >> exactly! that's what is often needed... something that is not updated.. > > I still do not understand, if you need something that is not updated, > then do not update... It is not just about updates but about new installs too - if you have dozens of machines for customers and you need them all in the same version. Then some customer need some package not installed on his machine and you cannot run "pkg install somepackage" because then you will end up with upgrade of already installed packages (dependencies) before new package from current quaterly branch is installed. (I do not use this scheme, but I understand the environment where somebody needs frozen pkg repo for much longer time than 3 months) Miroslav Lachman