On 02 June 2012 PM 4:18:45 O. Hartmann wrote:
> On 06/02/12 14:47, Daniel Kalchev wrote:
> > On 02.06.12 15:32, Erich wrote:
> >> I know that the ports tree is a moving target. But it stops moving
> >> during the release period. This could be used to give a fall back
> >> solution.
> >> Or do I see this really too simple?
> > The ports tree is a moving target during release periods still, although
> > there are efforts to make movements smaller. This is why, after a
> > release it suddenly moves more :)
> > Daniel
> Even IF the ports tree IS a moving target, updating of UPDATING, for
> instance, follows most times AFTER the critical ports has been
> changed/updated and folks started updating their ports without realizing
> that they have shot themselfs into the foot!
it is worse when people suddenly need something they did not install before.
> Since I'm with FreeBSD, StarOffice, OpenOffice and even now LibreOffice
> is a MESS! If you need to keep up with STABLE, in most cases due to
StarOffice a mess? Not compared to OpenOffice! I cannot remember that I have had such problems with StarOffice.
As I used StarOffice to write cheques those days, people getting money from me would have made a lot of noise. I stopped doing this when OpenOffice came into the picture.
> modern hardware (*), binary packages are NOT provided or if so, they
> won't work due to some incompatibilities.
Isn't the lack of a binary package the proof that something is difficult to compile?
> I witnessed those cases several times and at this moment, our four
> remaining FreeBSD servers and my personal desktop as well as my private
> box are rendered "unusable" in terms of having no LibreOffice since it
> doesn't compile anymore on FreeBSD 9-STABLE/amd64 and 10-CURRENT/amd64.
Can I recommend jails to you? I compile ports in a jail. When everything went through, I move this outside and install it. If something does not compile, I keep normally the old ports tree.
This is the main cause why I run the in serious problems when I need a new port which needs an update of the ports tree.
> At the moment, this mess is introduced with a new PNG library. And we
> are updating on "life" machines, that means, they are not freshly
Have fun with it. I have a running FreeBSD and will not touch the ports tree before this all has settled.
> installed, they have been maintained for several months now. Very often,
> when compalining about this, I get responses from people installing then
> the critical software in a virtual machine and/or on newly setup boxes.
> That doesn't reflect the way the systems have to be maintained.
This gets even more complicated. Try once to install a new machine, bring an old machine to the same state and then install on the new machine the same software which actually runs on the old one.
This is something which I never managed. There is always something missing.
> Well, one may argue with me about "server" and "desktop". Comparing
> Linux (several distros) with FreeBSd and Windows makes the limited
> adavntages of FreeBSD getting rendered neglegible. We need PowerPoint or
> a similar office product for presentations, I'm getting strangled by
> students when using LaTeX and "beamer" or "PowerDot". The pressure from
> the Windows world is large.
You forgot to mention Scribus. It is a fantastic tool for people who know how to handle it.
But your are cut off if you cannot read the files coming from other people.
Just for the fun. If you get Microsoft-Formats from a client and send it then back to the same client but in a different department, it is not sure that they can read their 'own' files.
> (*) It might be true that FreeBSD runs well on older hardware. But when
> I order hardware from the budget I get, I do not want myself buying
> outdated hardware.
FreeBSD runs also well on new hardware if it is not a notebook.
What I really do not understand in this whole discussion is very simple. Is it just a few people who run into problems like this or is this simply ignored by the people who set the strategy for FreeBSD?
I mention since yeares here that putting version numbers onto the port tree would solve many of these problems. All I get as an answer is that it is not possible.
I think that this should be easily possible with the limitation that older versions do not have security fixes. Yes, but of what help is a security fix if there is no running port for the fix?