Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 10:12:41 -0400 (EDT) From: rdkeys@csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu To: jamie@itribe.net (Jamie Bowden) Cc: rdkeys@csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu (), freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Suggestions from a unix dummy..... Message-ID: <9708261412.AA132879@csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu> In-Reply-To: <199708261210.IAA23245@gatekeeper.itribe.net> from "Jamie Bowden" at Aug 26, 97 08:14:31 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > On Mon, 25 Aug 1997, Tim Vanderhoek wrote: > > > Officially ports are only supported on -stable. This is to keep > > the amount of work manageable. However, if you find a port that > > doesn't work on -current or any other release (PROVIDED you are > > using an up-to-date bsd.port.mk and friends), you are encouraged > > to send patches in a pr. > > This is wrong, IMHO. Ports should build on the latest official release. > > Jamie Bowden > > System Administrator, iTRiBE.net > > >From the philosophical point of view, why is it not acceptable that ports should make on ANY FreeBSD box? Assuming that one starts from fresh archive sources (and it seems to this unix dummy that they do) unless one has more than trivial patches, a make is a make is a make. I have ported a lot of minor things to my boxes (aix/minix/linux/FreeBSD). Aside from the quirks of my early aix 1.2 and my minix not being ``GCC compliant'', I find that essentially everything makes out of the box on all the machines. Porting is not that difficult anymore (99% of the time). Most sources make out of the box with any sort of half-intelligent configure script. That would make me still think a common ports tree across all FreeBSD platforms would be an ideal goal, and not that difficult to attain. Then, again, I am just the unix dummy..... Bob Keys rdkeys@csemail.cropsci.ncsu.edu
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9708261412.AA132879>