From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 18 10:55:56 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21D1416A4DD for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 10:55:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amdmi3@mail.ru) Received: from mx7.mail.ru (mx7.mail.ru [194.67.23.27]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ACA543D49 for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 10:55:55 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from amdmi3@mail.ru) Received: from [213.148.29.33] (port=28746 helo=nexii.panopticon) by mx7.mail.ru with esmtp id 1GE214-000NLP-00 for ports@freebsd.org; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 14:55:54 +0400 Received: from hades.panopticon (hades.panopticon [192.168.0.2]) by nexii.panopticon (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D16B17053 for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 14:56:01 +0400 (MSD) Received: by hades.panopticon (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A6797409D; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 14:56:00 +0400 (MSD) Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 14:56:00 +0400 From: Dmitry Marakasov To: ports@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060818105600.GA6359@hades.panopticon> References: <20060816123335.GA42090@underworld.novel.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060816123335.GA42090@underworld.novel.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.12-2006-07-14 Cc: Subject: Re: ports tree tagging again X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 10:55:56 -0000 * Roman Bogorodskiy (novel@freebsd.org) wrote: > 2. Port tree is unstable > > IMO, port tree is not very stable. I mean: we're all human and more or > less often make mistakes and inaccurate commits. So you cannot be sure > that if you cvsup/portsnap your tree, it will not break something > (e.g. because of some typo). It's OK to have such errors in general, and > we can do nothing with it, but there are a lot of silly errors which > could be avoided and you definitely don't deal with on a stable system. I won't call it unstable. I myself have 3 FreeBSD boxes with about 600 ports installed on each. Two boxes are updated regularily, anoher one have some ports outdated - for all those I can't remember any problems for 2-3 years. If there actually are any breakages, I don't think they cost the effort of maintaining branched ports tree. -- Best regards, Dmitry mailto:amdmi3@mail.ru