Right, well here is another one:
The missing symlink for /etc/ssl/cert.pem
There is no reason it should not be in
Except that the folder etc/ssl/ only exists in base.
Without this symlink, then SSL certs aren't found by the 'fetch'
command and many significant websites these days can't work without
SSL. For example github.com (there are others).
On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Craig Rodrigues <rodr...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Bryan Drewery <bdrew...@freebsd.org> wrote:
>> There's no reason for bash (and perl) to be exceptions to the 24000
>> other ports that install to /usr/local/bin. I can think of dozens of
>> other ports that will fall into the same arguments being made here, but
>> it does not mean it is the right thing for FreeBSD.
>> If you want to install the symlink on your system feel free to do it. I
>> install a static bash to /bin/bash on mine and only because I prefer
>> bash shell and want it in / for single-user mode. That's my personal
>> choice though.
>> The proper fix is to fix scripts to be portable and use #! /usr/bin/env
>> bash rather than /bin/bash.
> Technically, I agree with you that people should write portable shell
> and use #!/usr/bin/env bash rather than #!/bin/bash.
> Pushing that behavior upstream is not always practical these days, where
> FreeBSD is in the minority, while Linux and MacOS X are in the vast
> majority of where
> people are doing development and learning how to write shell scripts these
> The /bin/bash thing is relatively minor, but I brought it up, because I see
> it so much.
> I've seen it in the jobs that I've worked at. I've also seen it when
> dealing with Google
> Summer of Code students. I've seen it in blogs mentioned when Linux users
> evaluate FreeBSD.
> I've seen it when people design appliances based on FreeBSD, but want the
> device to be
> "familiar" enough for Linux-y devops people to interact with it.
> If there are minor things that we can do in FreeBSD to improve the
> out-of-box experience
> of FreeBSD to new users who may be used to Linux or MacOS X, that would be
> Telling people to change their shell scripts, or manually create symlinks
> to /bin/bash is doable,
> but why not have something in the system do this automatically, so that the
> average end-user does
> not even have to think about it?
> If adding an optional knob to the bash port which is OFF by default to do
> this is a no-go,
> would having an optional port like what Brooks Davis mentioned be allowed
> which creates
> the symlink and updates /etc/shells?
> freebsd-po...@freebsd.org mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
email@example.com mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"