From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Feb 29 00:36:59 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AD791065672;
	Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:36:59 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from bakul@bitblocks.com)
Received: from mail.bitblocks.com (mail.bitblocks.com [64.142.15.60])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25DF78FC23;
	Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:36:59 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from bakul@bitblocks.com)
Received: from bitblocks.com (localhost.bitblocks.com [127.0.0.1])
	by mail.bitblocks.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2A455B50;
	Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:13:43 -0800 (PST)
To: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:54:55 +0100."
	<47C749CF.4010501@FreeBSD.org> 
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:13:43 -0800
From: Bakul Shah <bakul@bitblocks.com>
Message-Id: <20080229001343.C2A455B50@mail.bitblocks.com>
Cc: Marko Lerota <mlerota@iskon.hr>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Upgrading to 7.0 - stupid requirements 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:36:59 -0000

On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:54:55 +0100 Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>  wrote:
> portupgrade -faP requests to reinstall everything from precompiled 
> packages.  It will only fall back to compiling them locally if the 
> package is unavailable (e.g. for legal reasons).
> 
> Second, the reason for this requirement is explained in the 
> announcement.  In fact, it has *always* been required to recompile ports 
> when moving to a new major release of FreeBSD, for guaranteed correct 
> operation when some of the ports are updated later on.

Er... Can't one run old binaries after installing one or more
of usr/ports/misc/compat-[3456]x -- that has not changed, has
it?

I agree that people *should* recompile but it is not always
possible or convenient and in such cases the compat libraries
are a good crutch. In face one strong point of freebsd has
been (or was) backward compatibility.

> This is not FreeBSD-specific advice.  It is true on any operating system 
> when the underlying set of libraries changes in an incompatible way. 
> However, on FreeBSD this *only* happens betweeen version branches.

Almost all commercial OSes provide some degree of backward
compatibility; some do much better (such as IBM & SGI).