Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 16 Aug 2024 16:09:06 +0200
From:      Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Chris <portmaster@bsdforge.com>
Cc:        Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz>, henrichhartzer@tuta.io, Freebsd Ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: quarterly 2024Q3 amd64 / 13.3 missing all vital packages for desktop
Message-ID:  <F2864256-ADF9-4752-82B7-3FF9A0B055BB@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <b308436009f0b342d0a417b351f1c01d@bsdforge.com>
References:  <608da216-2047-4fdd-b48b-88659dedb27c@quip.cz> <O4NO4ux--3-9@tuta.io> <3c600636-34a5-4d6c-86d6-f04da1daa806@quip.cz> <b308436009f0b342d0a417b351f1c01d@bsdforge.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 16 Aug 2024, at 15:49, Chris <portmaster@bsdforge.com> wrote:
>=20
> On 2024-08-16 00:37, Miroslav Lachman wrote:
>> On 16/08/2024 01:34, henrichhartzer@tuta.io wrote:
>>> Hi Miroslav,
>>> Please see my email titled: "Quarterly backport for multimedia/x265 =
patch" sent to this list a few hours before yours. Shortly after sending =
it, the patch was committed to 2024Q3. Builders will have to catch up, =
but hopefully things can be resolved.
>>> I do feel like this could have been caught and fixed faster with =
some better alerting. I've heard of pkg-fallout and know little of it, =
but maybe it should have noticed this? Or did it? I have no idea.
>>> I know it's a terrible experience when pkg is wanting to remove your =
desktop packages in bulk.
>> Thank you for pointing to this thread.
>> This is really bad experience with quarterly branch. I think the =
branch should be
>> published only after the successful build of main packages. Blindly =
created
>> quarterly branch which is not working for about 6 weeks is terrible =
experience.
> While I completely agree. I'm wondering if this isn't more a pkg(8) =
deficit. eg; if pkg first
> determined that all/most of the packages intended to be upgraded did =
not exist, issue a warn, with the
> option to bail/quit. Leaving the system untouched.

Last time I checked "pkg upgrade" asks "Proceed with this action? =
[y/N]", and the default is "N". So what you are suggesting, is already =
the case?

This is a problem with patches (or really any distfiles) that are =
retrieved from websites which are not under FreeBSD's control. If those =
websites decide to change the contents of those files, there is not much =
we can do about it, and ports which used to work then simply break. If =
other ports depend on those, those break too, there is not much you can =
do, except postponing upgrades.

-Dimitry




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F2864256-ADF9-4752-82B7-3FF9A0B055BB>