On Sun, 11 Sep 2011, Greg Byshenk wrote:
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 01:05:49PM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote:
Why?
Because, in the cases here under discussion, there is somethin "wrong"
(for some value of 'wrong') with the software in question. I can't
speak for Matthias or Chris, but I think the point here is that (at
least some) people don't want to make foot-shooting easier.
Slippery slope: consider PHP, or Apache, or any MTA. Or newfs.
Someone who can't figure out how to install some software if it takes
more than 'portinstall <software>' almost certainly isn't knowledgeable
enough to evaluate the risks of installing buggy, exploitable, or
unmaintained software.
The ports system and FreeBSD in general are not capable of accurately
assessing a user's abilities or situation.
Informing the user of problems with a port is certainly within the scope
of the ports system, or a hypothetical "bring back a removed port" tool.
But the responsibility for the installation and use of any software is
all on the informed user. The difficulty or ease of bringing back a
removed port does not change that.
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
