Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Friday, June 29, 2012 5:50:05 am Gergely CZUCZY wrote: Hello, I'm mostly using freebsd, but there are a few cases where it's impossible to do, and because of these, i'm not using fbsd there. These reasons are mostly are: - Lack of a working infiniband/OFED stack, with all its utils, mellanox connectX3 drivers, RDMA, iscsi-over-RDMA, nfs-over-RDMA, and such things. FYI, OFED is present in 9.0 and later including mellanox drivers. RDMA should be present, but I've no idea about iscsi-over-RDMA or nfs-over-RDMA. -- John Baldwin ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 10:55:04 -0400 John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: On Friday, June 29, 2012 5:50:05 am Gergely CZUCZY wrote: Hello, I'm mostly using freebsd, but there are a few cases where it's impossible to do, and because of these, i'm not using fbsd there. These reasons are mostly are: - Lack of a working infiniband/OFED stack, with all its utils, mellanox connectX3 drivers, RDMA, iscsi-over-RDMA, nfs-over-RDMA, and such things. FYI, OFED is present in 9.0 and later including mellanox drivers. RDMA should be present, but I've no idea about iscsi-over-RDMA or nfs-over-RDMA. Agreed, it's present. However, it's not in a functional state. Half of the toolkit is missing, and we couldn't get out of the system any better than icmp responses. any other means of communication failed to work. Yup, present, but not functional :) ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Monday, July 02, 2012 1:23:29 pm Gergely CZUCZY wrote: On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 10:55:04 -0400 John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: On Friday, June 29, 2012 5:50:05 am Gergely CZUCZY wrote: Hello, I'm mostly using freebsd, but there are a few cases where it's impossible to do, and because of these, i'm not using fbsd there. These reasons are mostly are: - Lack of a working infiniband/OFED stack, with all its utils, mellanox connectX3 drivers, RDMA, iscsi-over-RDMA, nfs-over-RDMA, and such things. FYI, OFED is present in 9.0 and later including mellanox drivers. RDMA should be present, but I've no idea about iscsi-over-RDMA or nfs-over-RDMA. Agreed, it's present. However, it's not in a functional state. Half of the toolkit is missing, and we couldn't get out of the system any better than icmp responses. any other means of communication failed to work. Yup, present, but not functional :) Hmm, in my local testing we've been able to use the 40G mlxen(4) adapters fine with the OFED stack. I believe we have also done a bit more involved testing on the IB side than just ping as well (at least RX and TX of UDP packets). -- John Baldwin ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 13:52:25 -0400 John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: On Monday, July 02, 2012 1:23:29 pm Gergely CZUCZY wrote: On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 10:55:04 -0400 John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote: On Friday, June 29, 2012 5:50:05 am Gergely CZUCZY wrote: Hello, I'm mostly using freebsd, but there are a few cases where it's impossible to do, and because of these, i'm not using fbsd there. These reasons are mostly are: - Lack of a working infiniband/OFED stack, with all its utils, mellanox connectX3 drivers, RDMA, iscsi-over-RDMA, nfs-over-RDMA, and such things. FYI, OFED is present in 9.0 and later including mellanox drivers. RDMA should be present, but I've no idea about iscsi-over-RDMA or nfs-over-RDMA. Agreed, it's present. However, it's not in a functional state. Half of the toolkit is missing, and we couldn't get out of the system any better than icmp responses. any other means of communication failed to work. Yup, present, but not functional :) Hmm, in my local testing we've been able to use the 40G mlxen(4) adapters fine with the OFED stack. I believe we have also done a bit more involved testing on the IB side than just ping as well (at least RX and TX of UDP packets). Well, it didn't work for us. We have the connext3 cards. And our goal was making iscsi-over-RDMA and NFS-over-RDMA work. Though at the end we've settled with linux and not using RDMA, because that's kinda messy. When we've tried to do some testin with netcat, no packets were transmitted really. They've got somewhere lost, there had been some error message in the syslog, which i can't recall now. We felt like the packets are getting lost somewhere between the OFED and the IP stack. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
Hmm, in my local testing we've been able to use the 40G mlxen(4) adapters fine with the OFED stack. I believe we have also done a bit more involved testing on the IB side than just ping as well (at least RX and TX of UDP packets). Well, it didn't work for us. We have the connext3 cards. And our goal was making iscsi-over-RDMA and NFS-over-RDMA work. Though at the end we've settled with linux and not using RDMA, because that's kinda messy. When we've tried to do some testin with netcat, no packets were transmitted really. They've got somewhere lost, there had been some error message in the syslog, which i can't recall now. We felt like the packets are getting lost somewhere between the OFED and the IP stack. Have you run subnet manager (e.g. opensm)? Infinband networks doesn't work without it. --- wbr, Николай ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 21:25:58 +0300 nickolas...@gmail.com wrote: Hmm, in my local testing we've been able to use the 40G mlxen(4) adapters fine with the OFED stack. I believe we have also done a bit more involved testing on the IB side than just ping as well (at least RX and TX of UDP packets). Well, it didn't work for us. We have the connext3 cards. And our goal was making iscsi-over-RDMA and NFS-over-RDMA work. Though at the end we've settled with linux and not using RDMA, because that's kinda messy. When we've tried to do some testin with netcat, no packets were transmitted really. They've got somewhere lost, there had been some error message in the syslog, which i can't recall now. We felt like the packets are getting lost somewhere between the OFED and the IP stack. Have you run subnet manager (e.g. opensm)? Infinband networks doesn't work without it. Definitely. We have it running now, just with linux. We're not computer illiterates, however also not kernel hackers. --- wbr, Николай ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
Hello, I'm mostly using freebsd, but there are a few cases where it's impossible to do, and because of these, i'm not using fbsd there. These reasons are mostly are: - Lack of a working infiniband/OFED stack, with all its utils, mellanox connectX3 drivers, RDMA, iscsi-over-RDMA, nfs-over-RDMA, and such things. - Lack of proper support for a decent hypervisor for virtualisation. We can't make a hypervisor out of freebsd, if there are no such virtualisations available like XEN, kvm or something similar, that just works out of the box. - Lack of decent OCI support (oracle client lib). Sometimes we need OCI libs, for things like monitoring oracle databases. Without the client libs, this becomes kinda problematic. Usually these are the top reasons. Best regards, Gergely ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Hypervisor ( was Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ? )
- Lack of proper support for a decent hypervisor for virtualisation. We can't make a hypervisor out of freebsd, if there are no such virtualisations available like XEN, kvm or something similar, that just works out of the box. What do you need that VirtualBox doesn't provide ? I used to bemoan the lack of a hypervisor too, but vince VBox arrived in FreeBSD I have had no complaints. I use it to run Windows instances both as desktop clients and also servers, and it works beautifully. Combined with a ZVOL underneath (and hence all the delights of ZFS snapshots) it';s a great solution. -pete. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Hypervisor ( was Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ? )
On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 10:55:20 +0100 Pete French petefre...@ingresso.co.uk wrote: - Lack of proper support for a decent hypervisor for virtualisation. We can't make a hypervisor out of freebsd, if there are no such virtualisations available like XEN, kvm or something similar, that just works out of the box. What do you need that VirtualBox doesn't provide ? I used to bemoan the lack of a hypervisor too, but vince VBox arrived in FreeBSD I have had no complaints. I use it to run Windows instances both as desktop clients and also servers, and it works beautifully. Combined with a ZVOL underneath (and hence all the delights of ZFS snapshots) it';s a great solution. Yes, virtualbox is not that bad. However, to get some really nice features, you need the non-free version. Also, we can use citrix's xenserver's management tool to manage non-citrix xen clusters, because the API is same. With that we get a management tool for our clusters, which is really nice. Also I didn't know that virtualbox is capable of building clusters of nodes and bouncing VMs among nodes to balance load, and capable of doing such things, i might be lacking a bit here, sorry. -pete. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Hypervisor ( was Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ? )
Yes, virtualbox is not that bad. However, to get some really nice features, you need the non-free version. Also, we can use citrix's xenserver's management tool to manage non-citrix xen clusters, because the API is same. With that we get a management tool for our clusters, which is really nice. OK, makes sennse. Also I didn't know that virtualbox is capable of building clusters of nodes and bouncing VMs among nodes to balance load, and capable of doing such things, i might be lacking a bit here, sorry. I belive if you have an iscsi storage backend for a runnign node it can be moved transparently to another physsical hardware node without stopping running, but I havent tried it myself I ahve to admit. cheers, -pete. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: pkgng (Was: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?)
On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 04:09:53PM -0400, Chris Nehren wrote: On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 14:50:22 -0500 , Bryan Drewery wrote: FWIW, there is freebsd-update(8) now for binary updating of base, and pkgng[1] will allow binary upgrading of packages/ports similar to apt-get. [1] http://wiki.freebsd.org/pkgng The thing that really has me attracted to pkgng is that it's based on a C library with a public API that developers can use / abuse. It's not (AFAIK) officially released yet, but some early work I've been doing with it has shown it to be useful enough. -- Thanks and best regards, Chris Nehren ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org Do not hesitate to propose patches or bring feedback on how we can improve the situation with library. The API is public but will only be consider as stable before 2.0, because it can be greatly improved and we hope to have reviews and feedback and cleanup before marking it stable. regards, Bapt pgpaZhs06qJxn.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
In message 7b6e5361-b109-498e-b22f-96a94dec3...@mac.com, Chuck Swiger writes: Hi, Dave-- On Jun 11, 2012, at 4:35 PM, Dave Hayes wrote: [ ... ] Do I have this wrong? Anyone see a problem with this picture? What can we do to just upgrade in a safe fashion when we want to? Two things help tremendously: #1: Have working backups. If you run into a problem, roll back the system to a working state. If you cannot restore a working system easily, fix your backup solution until you can rollback easily. #2: Have a package-building box and test builds before installing new package builds to other boxes. Your downtime for upgrades to the rest of your boxes become minimized. Note: this doesn't require multiple physical systems to do. A jail / chroot area will give you a perfectly fine build / test system for ports. It just uses a bit of disk space. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Monday 11 June 2012 20:59 Chuck Swiger wrote: Hi, Dave-- On Jun 11, 2012, at 4:35 PM, Dave Hayes wrote: [ ... ] Do I have this wrong? Anyone see a problem with this picture? What can we do to just upgrade in a safe fashion when we want to? Two things help tremendously: #1: Have working backups. If you run into a problem, roll back the system to a working state. If you cannot restore a working system easily, fix your backup solution until you can rollback easily. #2: Have a package-building box and test builds before installing new package builds to other boxes. Your downtime for upgrades to the rest of your boxes become minimized. Regards, of course it helps ... but please do not forget that most people just want their desktop up to date and have a working kde (or any other) environment I believe the ports tree simply must? should? be seen as it is, partially good working, and partially a jorney to very dark places , depends on which ports and how many you have installed in any case it is for somebody who knows what he does and can find his way out, or is courageous, a normal desktop user probably is not able to upgrade kde4 properly and ends up with an unusable machine On Monday 11 June 2012 20:20 Dave Hayes wrote: Rainer Duffner rai...@ultra-secure.de writes: Sometimes, options only make sense in context of the selection of options of other ports and it thus may no be easily explainable in one line. I don't understand Are you saying this is a reason not to document what these options do? both here deepen the lead into the dark theory On Sunday 10 June 2012 14:10 O. Hartmann wrote: portmaster does even more damage. Sometimed a port reels in some newly updates, a port gets deleted. if on of the to be updated prerquisits fail, the port in question isn't there anymore. this is caused of ports tree's install script maior logic failure, BTW by portmaster AND portupgrade and it happens quite often, as already commented, nobody sits in front of the screen and watch the compile process so this problems go under at first sight I think, correcting this, would help a lot and may solve a lot of existing [hidden] problems. I see only one way, having a complete package collection for easy upgrade most of you do not like it, but you must look at the competitors, Fedoras upgrade system works, user do not need the newest features and none of them are essential for a desktop to work properly of course the package collection needs then something similar to portversion, but not based on ports tree versions, in order to find available updates who then wants to customize or learn or who dares, can use the ports tree after all I guess any further effort on ports goes nowhere because it depends at the end on the maintainer and/or committer and people use to fail, that is so and nobody can change that. Of course It would be nice to find this eval behaviour of deleting accidentially installed ports corrected what is worth working on is a complete package collection and a propper update tool for it Hans signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Jun 12, 2012 10:48 AM, H h...@hm.net.br wrote: On Monday 11 June 2012 20:59 Chuck Swiger wrote: Hi, Dave-- On Jun 11, 2012, at 4:35 PM, Dave Hayes wrote: [ ... ] Do I have this wrong? Anyone see a problem with this picture? What can we do to just upgrade in a safe fashion when we want to? Two things help tremendously: #1: Have working backups. If you run into a problem, roll back the system to a working state. If you cannot restore a working system easily, fix your backup solution until you can rollback easily. #2: Have a package-building box and test builds before installing new package builds to other boxes. Your downtime for upgrades to the rest of your boxes become minimized. Regards, of course it helps ... but please do not forget that most people just want their desktop up to date and have a working kde (or any other) environment I believe the ports tree simply must? should? be seen as it is, partially good working, and partially a jorney to very dark places , depends on which ports and how many you have installed in any case it is for somebody who knows what he does and can find his way out, or is courageous, a normal desktop user probably is not able to upgrade kde4 properly and ends up with an unusable machine On Monday 11 June 2012 20:20 Dave Hayes wrote: Rainer Duffner rai...@ultra-secure.de writes: Sometimes, options only make sense in context of the selection of options of other ports and it thus may no be easily explainable in one line. I don't understand Are you saying this is a reason not to document what these options do? both here deepen the lead into the dark theory On Sunday 10 June 2012 14:10 O. Hartmann wrote: portmaster does even more damage. Sometimed a port reels in some newly updates, a port gets deleted. if on of the to be updated prerquisits fail, the port in question isn't there anymore. this is caused of ports tree's install script maior logic failure, BTW by portmaster AND portupgrade and it happens quite often, as already commented, nobody sits in front of the screen and watch the compile process so this problems go under at first sight I think, correcting this, would help a lot and may solve a lot of existing [hidden] problems. I see only one way, having a complete package collection for easy upgrade most of you do not like it, but you must look at the competitors, Fedoras upgrade system works, user do not need the newest features and none of them are essential for a desktop to work properly of course the package collection needs then something similar to portversion, but not based on ports tree versions, in order to find available updates who then wants to customize or learn or who dares, can use the ports tree You have hit the nail right on the head there, and that is the intention with pkgng. Please feel free to have a go with it using the beta repos :) Chris ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Tuesday 12 June 2012 07:10 Chris Rees wrote: are essential for a desktop to work properly of course the package collection needs then something similar to portversion, but not based on ports tree versions, in order to find available updates who then wants to customize or learn or who dares, can use the ports tree You have hit the nail right on the head there, and that is the intention with pkgng. Please feel free to have a go with it using the beta repos :) Chris yooo ... but I unfortunately since some time pkgng completes the ports tree novell :) cc -O2 -pipe -march=athlon-mp -fno-strict-aliasing -march=athlon-mp -std=c99 -I/dados/ports/ports-mgmt/pkg/work/pkg-1.0-beta15/libpkg - I/dados/ports/ports-mgmt/pkg/work/pkg-1.0-beta15/libpkg/../external/sqlite - I/dados/ports/ports-mgmt/pkg/work/pkg-1.0- beta15/libpkg/../external/libyaml/include -DPREFIX=\/usr/local\ -g -O0 - std=gnu99 -fstack-protector -Wsystem-headers -Werror -Wall -Wno-format-y2k -W -Wno-unused-parameter -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Wreturn-type -Wcast-qual -Wwrite-strings -Wswitch -Wshadow -Wunused-parameter -Wcast-align -Wchar-subscripts -Winline -Wnested-externs -Wredundant-decls - Wold-style-definition -Wno-pointer-sign -c usergroup.c -o usergroup.o cc1: warnings being treated as errors In file included from usergroup.c:36: private/gr_util.h:27: warning: redundant redeclaration of 'gr_copy' /usr/include/libutil.h:165: warning: previous declaration of 'gr_copy' was here private/gr_util.h:28: warning: redundant redeclaration of 'gr_fini' /usr/include/libutil.h:168: warning: previous declaration of 'gr_fini' was here private/gr_util.h:29: warning: redundant redeclaration of 'gr_init' /usr/include/libutil.h:169: warning: previous declaration of 'gr_init' was here private/gr_util.h:30: warning: redundant redeclaration of 'gr_lock' /usr/include/libutil.h:170: warning: previous declaration of 'gr_lock' was here private/gr_util.h:31: warning: redundant redeclaration of 'gr_mkdb' /usr/include/libutil.h:172: warning: previous declaration of 'gr_mkdb' was here private/gr_util.h:32: warning: redundant redeclaration of 'gr_tmp' /usr/include/libutil.h:173: warning: previous declaration of 'gr_tmp' was here *** Error code 1 Stop in /dados/ports/ports-mgmt/pkg/work/pkg-1.0-beta15/libpkg. *** Error code 1 Stop in /dados/ports/ports-mgmt/pkg/work/pkg-1.0-beta15. *** Error code 1 Hans -- H +55 17 4141. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Documenting ports options (was Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?)
[ This probably should be redirected to freebsd-ports but I am not subscribed so the anal mailer will likely reject such a submission ] Rainer Duffner rai...@ultra-secure.de writes: Am 06.06.2012 um 20:59 schrieb Dave Hayes: I believe this is the first time I've seen more documentation labeled as extraneous. :) I had thought to suggest an implementation by having a simple pkg-option-desr file which describes the options and implications in each port. Are you suggesting that such a file would be unwelcome? No, but take a look at the nginx port, which (I'm too lazy to count) has gained a couple of dozens of options over the years. This is a port I use often, and yes...it's a lot of work to document it. It is good to read the nginx wiki to learn what these are and perhaps any initial foray into documenting these options should merely be a set of links, each one telling us where this option is discussed on the nginx wiki. I had to go read the wiki too, and it's required reading if you do advanced nginx work like I do. Still, it takes 5 minutes to add links to a text file in the port eh? Asking him to do even more work - I wouldn't dare to do that ;-) So don't ask, just write some links. ;) Sometimes, options only make sense in context of the selection of options of other ports and it thus may no be easily explainable in one line. I don't understand Are you saying this is a reason not to document what these options do? Personally, I don't need more frequent FreeBSD-releases but two or maybe three ports-tree freezes per year would be good. While I have learned a bit more about ports by reading this and other threads, I rarely worry about ports freezes. Production software in ports is a moving target (security fixes, bug fixes, etc). I use portsnap a lot. -- Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - d...@jetcafe.org The opinions expressed above are entirely my own Exaggeration is a standard peculiarity of man. To deprecate is often a form of exaggeration which people do not notice because it appears to be its opposite. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Documenting ports options (was Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?)
Rainer Duffnerrai...@ultra-secure.de writes: [..] Personally, I don't need more frequent FreeBSD-releases but two or maybe three ports-tree freezes per year would be good. Perhaps not so much freezes per se, but if there are particular dates at which the ports tree is known to compile properly (for some preferred definition of 'properly') those dates could be kept in a list somewhere, for people to use with the cvsup date= option? cheers, gja ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
Adam Strohl adams-free...@ateamsystems.com writes: There in lies the question -- why do you need to compile a port which was just released? Is it a security thing or is it I want the latest ? I'm just curious (and totally uninterested in how this ranks in your worse question list). If I weren't honorable, I'd consider this question a troll. It's so far afield from my daily reality...well I'm going to take this at face value, because maybe -I've- got something wrong. ;) Let's just consider Firefox, which has a rather aggressive release schedule (once a month). $ pkg_info -r firefox-10.0.3,1 | grep Dependency | wc -l 175 Look at some of these dependencies: $ pkg_info -r firefox-10.0.3,1 | grep Dependency | sort ... Dependency: cairo-1.10.2_3,1 ... Dependency: gtk-2.24.6 ... Dependency: libgnome-2.32.0 ... Dependency: perl-threaded-5.14.2_2 ... Dependency: python27-2.7.2_4 Basically, everytime you want to upgrade firefox to 'stay current', you are upgrading a fair number of heavyweight packages. The chances that these will change month to month are high. (In the interests of brevity I will leave the verification of this to interested parties). Any of the ports listed above can have dependencies and consequences that reach very far into your workflow. If you do not upgrade them, you risk that firefox breaks in unknown ways. This is a rock and a hard place...do you upgrade everything from scratch (safest, but the 48 hour downtime is not unreasonable) or do you try to just replace that one port (risky, but you'll likely be up in an hour)? For firefox, it might very well be a security thing that causes the upgrade. Note well that I am not running 12 (is it at 12 now? 13? urgh.) because I'm in development and I do not want to touch certain other ports. Do I have this wrong? Anyone see a problem with this picture? What can we do to just upgrade in a safe fashion when we want to? -- Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - d...@jetcafe.org The opinions expressed above are entirely my own The treasure house within you contains everything, and you are free to use it. You don't need to seek outside. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
Hi, Dave-- On Jun 11, 2012, at 4:35 PM, Dave Hayes wrote: [ ... ] Do I have this wrong? Anyone see a problem with this picture? What can we do to just upgrade in a safe fashion when we want to? Two things help tremendously: #1: Have working backups. If you run into a problem, roll back the system to a working state. If you cannot restore a working system easily, fix your backup solution until you can rollback easily. #2: Have a package-building box and test builds before installing new package builds to other boxes. Your downtime for upgrades to the rest of your boxes become minimized. Regards, -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Documenting ports options (was Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?)
On Jun 12, 2012, at 2:41 AM, grenville armitage wrote: Rainer Duffnerrai...@ultra-secure.de writes: [..] Personally, I don't need more frequent FreeBSD-releases but two or maybe three ports-tree freezes per year would be good. Perhaps not so much freezes per se, but if there are particular dates at which the ports tree is known to compile properly (for some preferred definition of 'properly') those dates could be kept in a list somewhere, for people to use with the cvsup date= option? I believe the reason this is not happening is that there is no date, when the ports tree does build all ports just fine. Some of the ports are not compilable if you compile other ports, or select certain options in other ports as well. For example, you might have a date, when KDE4 compiles and runs, just fine. But at the same date, you cannot say the same for say Gnome, or science/meep (random pick). It is of course doable. The reason nobody is doing it is because by the time you have stable ports tree lots of software in there and more importantly most of the mainstream software in there that sees active development is already out of date and sometimes with unattached security problems. There is a fundamental misconception of what the ports tree is. This is not the ready made software, where you just user portmaster/portinstall to add new software or you go to the port's directory and type make install. The ports tree is a collection of instructions how to build foreign to FreeBSD software, plus the necessary infrastructure and few common sense options and that is it. If you view it any other way, you are in trouble. The pick and install software functionality does not really exist in FreeBSD. The closest is to use packages and yet closer is the packaging system found in PC-BSD that uses the Apple style fat app approach. It is more appropriate to view FreeBSD and ports as the tools to build your own OS (in the sense that most people understand it) with functionality, tuning and packages you need. Of course, the ports system can be improved and is in fact, all the time. Daniel___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
Am Sat, 09 Jun 2012 21:09:09 +0700 schrieb Adam Strohl adams-free...@ateamsystems.com: I get the feeling people are updating their ports tree and then recompiling/reinstalling everything just because and then are complaining when one thing breaks (its the only thing I can think of). Hi. But it does not need to break. Sometimes it would be enough just to test if the port compiles before committing it (I'm talking about libreoffice here which is broken). Some people rely on some essential ports. I can understand that porters are not Gods and make errors, but they should be fixed within hours, when they have been found on important ports. I mean, ports collection is sure great and this is one of the aspects why I am using FreeBSD, but at the moment FreeBSD is losing strength here, in my opinion. Martin signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On 10 June 2012 11:12, Martin Sugioarto mar...@sugioarto.com wrote: Am Sat, 09 Jun 2012 21:09:09 +0700 schrieb Adam Strohl adams-free...@ateamsystems.com: I get the feeling people are updating their ports tree and then recompiling/reinstalling everything just because and then are complaining when one thing breaks (its the only thing I can think of). Hi. But it does not need to break. Sometimes it would be enough just to test if the port compiles before committing it (I'm talking about libreoffice here which is broken). Some people rely on some essential ports. I can understand that porters are not Gods and make errors, but they should be fixed within hours, when they have been found on important ports. I mean, ports collection is sure great and this is one of the aspects why I am using FreeBSD, but at the moment FreeBSD is losing strength here, in my opinion. Er... people always test their commits. Sometimes edge cases will creep in, such as the libreoffice failure which was due to different configurations, but to suggest that the commit wasn't tested is quite frankly insulting-- it built on a clean system perfectly well. Chris ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On 06/10/12 12:37, Chris Rees wrote: On 10 June 2012 11:12, Martin Sugioarto mar...@sugioarto.com wrote: Am Sat, 09 Jun 2012 21:09:09 +0700 schrieb Adam Strohl adams-free...@ateamsystems.com: I get the feeling people are updating their ports tree and then recompiling/reinstalling everything just because and then are complaining when one thing breaks (its the only thing I can think of). Hi. But it does not need to break. Sometimes it would be enough just to test if the port compiles before committing it (I'm talking about libreoffice here which is broken). Some people rely on some essential ports. I can understand that porters are not Gods and make errors, but they should be fixed within hours, when they have been found on important ports. I mean, ports collection is sure great and this is one of the aspects why I am using FreeBSD, but at the moment FreeBSD is losing strength here, in my opinion. Er... people always test their commits. Sometimes edge cases will creep in, such as the libreoffice failure which was due to different configurations, but to suggest that the commit wasn't tested is quite frankly insulting-- it built on a clean system perfectly well. Chris In do not see any insulting statement! Why those exaggerations? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On 10 June 2012 11:51, O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: On 06/10/12 12:37, Chris Rees wrote: On 10 June 2012 11:12, Martin Sugioarto mar...@sugioarto.com wrote: Am Sat, 09 Jun 2012 21:09:09 +0700 schrieb Adam Strohl adams-free...@ateamsystems.com: I get the feeling people are updating their ports tree and then recompiling/reinstalling everything just because and then are complaining when one thing breaks (its the only thing I can think of). Hi. But it does not need to break. Sometimes it would be enough just to test if the port compiles before committing it (I'm talking about libreoffice here which is broken). Some people rely on some essential ports. I can understand that porters are not Gods and make errors, but they should be fixed within hours, when they have been found on important ports. I mean, ports collection is sure great and this is one of the aspects why I am using FreeBSD, but at the moment FreeBSD is losing strength here, in my opinion. Er... people always test their commits. Sometimes edge cases will creep in, such as the libreoffice failure which was due to different configurations, but to suggest that the commit wasn't tested is quite frankly insulting-- it built on a clean system perfectly well. Chris In do not see any insulting statement! Why those exaggerations? Sometimes it would be enough just to test if the port compiles before committing it (I'm talking about libreoffice here which is broken) ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
Hi, On 08 June 2012 13:34:46 Steve Franks wrote: has been running 7.x for years, and shows no sign of giving out. Just keep sticking new HDD's in periodically. For a server that you rarely add new apps to, it's stellar. Mind you, it's probably chock full of security holes due to it's age... 7.4 is supported until beginning of next year. What stops you from keeping it 'current' on the 7 branch? Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
Am Sun, 10 Jun 2012 11:37:09 +0100 schrieb Chris Rees cr...@freebsd.org: Er... people always test their commits. Sometimes edge cases will creep in, such as the libreoffice failure which was due to different configurations, but to suggest that the commit wasn't tested is quite frankly insulting-- it built on a clean system perfectly well. Hi, I don't mean to insult anyone. As I have already told, I am really thankful that people invest their precious time into updating the ports collection. Whatever clean system means. It is surely not the default case that someone has got a freshly installed set of ports. Among all the default problems with ports, libreoffice[1] adds to the group of annoyances[2] at the moment. I don't know when I have seen portmaster -ad run through successfully last time. I need more and more -x options to exclude ports which fail to build. [1] german/libreoffice and libreoffice fails all the time in (LOCALIZED_LANG is set to de): Module 'lingucomponent' delivered successfully. 12 files copied, 2 files unchanged --- Oh dear - something failed during the build - sorry ! For more help with debugging build errors, please see the section in: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development internal build errors: ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making /usr/workdir-ports/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.2.2/vcl/prj it seems that the error is inside 'vcl', please re-run build inside this module to isolate the error and/or test your fix: --- Whatever this tries to tell me. I don't get it. This is a completely useless error message for me. [2] The default annoyances are for example: - After updating perl, php or whatever, it makes sense to enforce updating the modules that belong to these ports. I've seen 100x the same message that p5-XML-Parser does not work and know what it means, but this should be resolved by the port system. I mean, when you update perl, the perl modules won't work anymore. This is totally clear and it makes sense to update them first before going on. - When specifying WITHOUT_X11 the ports should respect this and not try to pull in the X11 variants of ports. I regularly see some ports pulling ImageMagick instead of the already installed ImageMagick-nox11. I still do not fully understand what is going on with WITHOUT_GNOME, but I'll try to figure it out later. But I am quite sure that some ports pull in unneeded Gnome dependencies. - Ports are being marked as interactive and stop the update process. The idea behind portmaster was (earlier) to avoid interactive building of ports and ask all the needed questions, before the builds start. I mean, earlier, I could get out and enjoy some coffee outdoors, now I have to sit at the keyboard. This is unacceptable! ;) - It would be nice to have a mechanism that tells you that your perl, mysql or whatever is not the default version anymore and you should consider updating to the default (and recommended) port. Martin signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On 06/10/12 09:54, Martin Sugioarto wrote: Am Sun, 10 Jun 2012 11:37:09 +0100 schrieb Chris Reescr...@freebsd.org: Er... people always test their commits. Sometimes edge cases will creep in, such as the libreoffice failure which was due to different configurations, but to suggest that the commit wasn't tested is quite frankly insulting-- it built on a clean system perfectly well. Hi, I don't mean to insult anyone. As I have already told, I am really thankful that people invest their precious time into updating the ports collection. Whatever clean system means. It is surely not the default case that someone has got a freshly installed set of ports. Among all the default problems with ports, libreoffice[1] adds to the group of annoyances[2] at the moment. I don't know when I have seen portmaster -ad run through successfully last time. I need more and more -x options to exclude ports which fail to build. [1] german/libreoffice and libreoffice fails all the time in (LOCALIZED_LANG is set to de): Module 'lingucomponent' delivered successfully. 12 files copied, 2 files unchanged --- Oh dear - something failed during the build - sorry ! For more help with debugging build errors, please see the section in: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development internal build errors: ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making /usr/workdir-ports/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.2.2/vcl/prj it seems that the error is inside 'vcl', please re-run build inside this module to isolate the error and/or test your fix: --- Whatever this tries to tell me. I don't get it. This is a completely useless error message for me. [2] The default annoyances are for example: - After updating perl, php or whatever, it makes sense to enforce updating the modules that belong to these ports. I've seen 100x the same message that p5-XML-Parser does not work and know what it means, but this should be resolved by the port system. I mean, when you update perl, the perl modules won't work anymore. This is totally clear and it makes sense to update them first before going on. - When specifying WITHOUT_X11 the ports should respect this and not try to pull in the X11 variants of ports. I regularly see some ports pulling ImageMagick instead of the already installed ImageMagick-nox11. I still do not fully understand what is going on with WITHOUT_GNOME, but I'll try to figure it out later. But I am quite sure that some ports pull in unneeded Gnome dependencies. - Ports are being marked as interactive and stop the update process. The idea behind portmaster was (earlier) to avoid interactive building of ports and ask all the needed questions, before the builds start. I mean, earlier, I could get out and enjoy some coffee outdoors, now I have to sit at the keyboard. This is unacceptable! ;) - It would be nice to have a mechanism that tells you that your perl, mysql or whatever is not the default version anymore and you should consider updating to the default (and recommended) port. Martin From /etc/defaults/periodic.conf: # 400.status-pkg weekly_status_pkg_enable=YES# Find out-of-date pkgs pkg_version=pkg_version # Use this program pkg_version_index=/usr/ports/INDEX-9 # Use this index file There's an override script in ports-mgmt/portupgrade that uses it's database, also. -- -- John M. Cooper ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
John Merryweather Cooper john_m_coo...@yahoo.com wrote: On 06/10/12 09:54, Martin Sugioarto wrote: [...] - It would be nice to have a mechanism that tells you that your perl, mysql or whatever is not the default version anymore and you should consider updating to the default (and recommended) port. From /etc/defaults/periodic.conf: # 400.status-pkg weekly_status_pkg_enable=YES# Find out-of-date pkgs That doesn't do what Martin asked for. It only tells you if a specific port has an update, but it won't tell you if the default version of a port changed. For example, when the default version of Python was changed from 2.6 to 2.7. It also won't tell you if the origin of a port doesn't exist anymore at all. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd That's what I love about GUIs: They make simple tasks easier, and complex tasks impossible. -- John William Chambless ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
WAS: Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ? New: port annoyance LibreOffice
On 06/10/12 17:43, John Merryweather Cooper wrote: On 06/10/12 09:54, Martin Sugioarto wrote: Am Sun, 10 Jun 2012 11:37:09 +0100 schrieb Chris Reescr...@freebsd.org: Er... people always test their commits. Sometimes edge cases will creep in, such as the libreoffice failure which was due to different configurations, but to suggest that the commit wasn't tested is quite frankly insulting-- it built on a clean system perfectly well. Hi, I don't mean to insult anyone. As I have already told, I am really thankful that people invest their precious time into updating the ports collection. Whatever clean system means. It is surely not the default case that someone has got a freshly installed set of ports. Among all the default problems with ports, libreoffice[1] adds to the group of annoyances[2] at the moment. I don't know when I have seen portmaster -ad run through successfully last time. I need more and more -x options to exclude ports which fail to build. [1] german/libreoffice and libreoffice fails all the time in (LOCALIZED_LANG is set to de): Module 'lingucomponent' delivered successfully. 12 files copied, 2 files unchanged --- Oh dear - something failed during the build - sorry ! For more help with debugging build errors, please see the section in: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development internal build errors: ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making /usr/workdir-ports/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.2.2/vcl/prj it seems that the error is inside 'vcl', please re-run build inside this module to isolate the error and/or test your fix: --- Whatever this tries to tell me. I don't get it. This is a completely useless error message for me. Not even in german/libreoffice. i try to build the standard version and I receive the same error. I can fix this by doing what the buildsystem suggests, but then I have a stop in sfx2 and others and it ends up in some module called tail_, where the build never ends when performing the repair as suggested. I had once a box running all the night looping building in this folder. [2] The default annoyances are for example: - After updating perl, php or whatever, it makes sense to enforce updating the modules that belong to these ports. I've seen 100x the same message that p5-XML-Parser does not work and know what it means, but this should be resolved by the port system. I mean, when you update perl, the perl modules won't work anymore. This is totally clear and it makes sense to update them first before going on. I can confirm that. I fixed that for me by portmaster p5- in case p5-SAX-XXX failed. - When specifying WITHOUT_X11 the ports should respect this and not try to pull in the X11 variants of ports. I regularly see some ports pulling ImageMagick instead of the already installed ImageMagick-nox11. I still do not fully understand what is going on with WITHOUT_GNOME, but I'll try to figure it out later. But I am quite sure that some ports pull in unneeded Gnome dependencies. - Ports are being marked as interactive and stop the update process. The idea behind portmaster was (earlier) to avoid interactive building of ports and ask all the needed questions, before the builds start. I mean, earlier, I could get out and enjoy some coffee outdoors, now I have to sit at the keyboard. This is unacceptable! ;) portmaster does even more damage. Sometimed a port reels in some newly updates, a port gets deleted. if on of the to be updated prerquisits fail, the port in question isn't there anymore. portmaster fails quite often in oberwriting remnant files. If a port gets corrupted by accident, like graphics/netpbm, One need to delete all binaries manually from /usr/local/bin, otherwise the installation fails. Somehow I wish to have a brute force knob to overwrite everything in a brutal way. - It would be nice to have a mechanism that tells you that your perl, mysql or whatever is not the default version anymore and you should consider updating to the default (and recommended) port. Martin From /etc/defaults/periodic.conf: # 400.status-pkg weekly_status_pkg_enable=YES# Find out-of-date pkgs pkg_version=pkg_version # Use this program pkg_version_index=/usr/ports/INDEX-9 # Use this index file There's an override script in ports-mgmt/portupgrade that uses it's database, also. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: WAS: Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ? New: port annoyance LibreOffice
On 10 June 2012 18:10, O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: On 06/10/12 17:43, John Merryweather Cooper wrote: On 06/10/12 09:54, Martin Sugioarto wrote: Am Sun, 10 Jun 2012 11:37:09 +0100 schrieb Chris Reescr...@freebsd.org: Er... people always test their commits. Sometimes edge cases will creep in, such as the libreoffice failure which was due to different configurations, but to suggest that the commit wasn't tested is quite frankly insulting-- it built on a clean system perfectly well. Hi, I don't mean to insult anyone. As I have already told, I am really thankful that people invest their precious time into updating the ports collection. Whatever clean system means. It is surely not the default case that someone has got a freshly installed set of ports. Among all the default problems with ports, libreoffice[1] adds to the group of annoyances[2] at the moment. I don't know when I have seen portmaster -ad run through successfully last time. I need more and more -x options to exclude ports which fail to build. [1] german/libreoffice and libreoffice fails all the time in (LOCALIZED_LANG is set to de): Module 'lingucomponent' delivered successfully. 12 files copied, 2 files unchanged --- Oh dear - something failed during the build - sorry ! For more help with debugging build errors, please see the section in: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development internal build errors: ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making /usr/workdir-ports/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.2.2/vcl/prj it seems that the error is inside 'vcl', please re-run build inside this module to isolate the error and/or test your fix: --- Whatever this tries to tell me. I don't get it. This is a completely useless error message for me. Not even in german/libreoffice. i try to build the standard version and I receive the same error. I can fix this by doing what the buildsystem suggests, but then I have a stop in sfx2 and others and it ends up in some module called tail_, where the build never ends when performing the repair as suggested. I had once a box running all the night looping building in this folder. [2] The default annoyances are for example: - After updating perl, php or whatever, it makes sense to enforce updating the modules that belong to these ports. I've seen 100x the same message that p5-XML-Parser does not work and know what it means, but this should be resolved by the port system. I mean, when you update perl, the perl modules won't work anymore. This is totally clear and it makes sense to update them first before going on. I can confirm that. I fixed that for me by portmaster p5- in case p5-SAX-XXX failed. There's an UPDATING message written for that very purpose. - When specifying WITHOUT_X11 the ports should respect this and not try to pull in the X11 variants of ports. I regularly see some ports pulling ImageMagick instead of the already installed ImageMagick-nox11. I still do not fully understand what is going on with WITHOUT_GNOME, but I'll try to figure it out later. But I am quite sure that some ports pull in unneeded Gnome dependencies. - Ports are being marked as interactive and stop the update process. The idea behind portmaster was (earlier) to avoid interactive building of ports and ask all the needed questions, before the builds start. I mean, earlier, I could get out and enjoy some coffee outdoors, now I have to sit at the keyboard. This is unacceptable! ;) portmaster does even more damage. Sometimed a port reels in some newly updates, a port gets deleted. if on of the to be updated prerquisits fail, the port in question isn't there anymore. portmaster fails quite often in oberwriting remnant files. If a port gets corrupted by accident, like graphics/netpbm, One need to delete all binaries manually from /usr/local/bin, otherwise the installation fails. Somehow I wish to have a brute force knob to overwrite everything in a brutal way. FORCE_PKG_REGISTER. - It would be nice to have a mechanism that tells you that your perl, mysql or whatever is not the default version anymore and you should consider updating to the default (and recommended) port. Martin From /etc/defaults/periodic.conf: # 400.status-pkg weekly_status_pkg_enable=YES # Find out-of-date pkgs pkg_version=pkg_version # Use this program pkg_version_index=/usr/ports/INDEX-9 # Use this index file There's an override script in ports-mgmt/portupgrade that uses it's database, also. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send
Re: WAS: Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ? New: port annoyance LibreOffice
On 06/10/12 19:20, Chris Rees wrote: On 10 June 2012 18:10, O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: On 06/10/12 17:43, John Merryweather Cooper wrote: On 06/10/12 09:54, Martin Sugioarto wrote: Am Sun, 10 Jun 2012 11:37:09 +0100 schrieb Chris Reescr...@freebsd.org: Er... people always test their commits. Sometimes edge cases will creep in, such as the libreoffice failure which was due to different configurations, but to suggest that the commit wasn't tested is quite frankly insulting-- it built on a clean system perfectly well. Hi, I don't mean to insult anyone. As I have already told, I am really thankful that people invest their precious time into updating the ports collection. Whatever clean system means. It is surely not the default case that someone has got a freshly installed set of ports. Among all the default problems with ports, libreoffice[1] adds to the group of annoyances[2] at the moment. I don't know when I have seen portmaster -ad run through successfully last time. I need more and more -x options to exclude ports which fail to build. [1] german/libreoffice and libreoffice fails all the time in (LOCALIZED_LANG is set to de): Module 'lingucomponent' delivered successfully. 12 files copied, 2 files unchanged --- Oh dear - something failed during the build - sorry ! For more help with debugging build errors, please see the section in: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development internal build errors: ERROR: error 65280 occurred while making /usr/workdir-ports/usr/ports/editors/libreoffice/work/libreoffice-core-3.5.2.2/vcl/prj it seems that the error is inside 'vcl', please re-run build inside this module to isolate the error and/or test your fix: --- Whatever this tries to tell me. I don't get it. This is a completely useless error message for me. Not even in german/libreoffice. i try to build the standard version and I receive the same error. I can fix this by doing what the buildsystem suggests, but then I have a stop in sfx2 and others and it ends up in some module called tail_, where the build never ends when performing the repair as suggested. I had once a box running all the night looping building in this folder. [2] The default annoyances are for example: - After updating perl, php or whatever, it makes sense to enforce updating the modules that belong to these ports. I've seen 100x the same message that p5-XML-Parser does not work and know what it means, but this should be resolved by the port system. I mean, when you update perl, the perl modules won't work anymore. This is totally clear and it makes sense to update them first before going on. I can confirm that. I fixed that for me by portmaster p5- in case p5-SAX-XXX failed. There's an UPDATING message written for that very purpose. And even WITH this message written in /usr/ports/UPDATING and follwoing those instrauctions, I have had the very same problem as for years now with this port. The problem is, if you'd like to do an automated or unattended update of the ports, you stumble very quickly in such a kind of show stopper. If you do not update on a regular basis, those problems develop in very serious problems. By the way, the reason why I update also the ports on a regular basis IS because of 100% sure problems if I wait for weeks or months. - When specifying WITHOUT_X11 the ports should respect this and not try to pull in the X11 variants of ports. I regularly see some ports pulling ImageMagick instead of the already installed ImageMagick-nox11. I still do not fully understand what is going on with WITHOUT_GNOME, but I'll try to figure it out later. But I am quite sure that some ports pull in unneeded Gnome dependencies. - Ports are being marked as interactive and stop the update process. The idea behind portmaster was (earlier) to avoid interactive building of ports and ask all the needed questions, before the builds start. I mean, earlier, I could get out and enjoy some coffee outdoors, now I have to sit at the keyboard. This is unacceptable! ;) portmaster does even more damage. Sometimed a port reels in some newly updates, a port gets deleted. if on of the to be updated prerquisits fail, the port in question isn't there anymore. portmaster fails quite often in oberwriting remnant files. If a port gets corrupted by accident, like graphics/netpbm, One need to delete all binaries manually from /usr/local/bin, otherwise the installation fails. Somehow I wish to have a brute force knob to overwrite everything in a brutal way. FORCE_PKG_REGISTER. Enabled by default in /etc/make.conf in my configuration. And the problem still persists ... signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
WAS: Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ? New: port annoyance LibreOffice
O. Hartmann writes: Among all the default problems with ports, libreoffice[1] adds to the group of annoyances[2] at the moment. I don't know when I have seen portmaster -ad run through successfully last time. I need more and more -x options to exclude ports which fail to build. [1] german/libreoffice and libreoffice fails all the time in (LOCALIZED_LANG is set to de): There is a known problem with libreoffice and boost, specifically a conflict between the boost port and the internal version. There is a work-around; however, at the moment the libreoffice maintainer does not have the time to rectify matters. See the recent/ongoing thread in either ports@ or office@ for more information. Robert Huff ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On 06/09/12 06:45, Adam Strohl wrote: On 6/9/2012 3:34, Steve Franks wrote: Every time libjpeg or perl or python bumps the rev, I have to explain to my boss that I won't be using my computer for 48 hours. Lucky man! We are off from some desktop services (like LibreOffice and Firefox) for more than a week now! signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On 6/9/2012 14:50, O. Hartmann wrote: Lucky man! We are off from some desktop services (like LibreOffice and Firefox) for more than a week now! Why did you update to begin with? Bug/security fix? -- Adam Strohl http://www.ateamsystems.com/ ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On 06/09/12 15:43, Adam Strohl wrote: On 6/9/2012 14:50, O. Hartmann wrote: Lucky man! We are off from some desktop services (like LibreOffice and Firefox) for more than a week now! Why did you update to begin with? Bug/security fix? -- Adam Strohl http://www.ateamsystems.com/ Well, this is a good question. Unfortunately, I did an update of the ports tree and PNG update rushed in. The information in UPDATING came a in bit later, but since then several ports have been updated already - and rendered some applications unuseable. The question why isn't applicable here. Sometimes ports need updates or a port that is installed reels in another or even an update and this triggers the avalnche of messes. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On 6/9/2012 21:04, O. Hartmann wrote: Well, this is a good question. Unfortunately, I did an update of the ports tree and PNG update rushed in. The information in UPDATING came a in bit later, but since then several ports have been updated already - and rendered some applications unuseable. The question why isn't applicable here. Sometimes ports need updates or a port that is installed reels in another or even an update and this triggers the avalnche of messes. Fair enough, I just feel like people reporting 48 hours of not using their computer are doing something extraordinarily weird and I'm just at a loss as to what they're doing and why. I get the feeling people are updating their ports tree and then recompiling/reinstalling everything just because and then are complaining when one thing breaks (its the only thing I can think of). -- Adam Strohl http://www.ateamsystems.com/ ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
Adam Strohl wrote: On 6/9/2012 3:34, Steve Franks wrote: Every time libjpeg or perl or python bumps the rev, I have to explain to my boss that I won't be using my computer for 48 hours. Why is this? And why are you updating every time there is a rev bump? certainly the worse question ever why is there an update, would be a little bit better but a real good question would be, why is there a not working/compiling update released to the ports tree Hans -- H +55 11 4249. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On 6/9/2012 21:36, H wrote: why is there an update, would be a little bit better My point was why do you need the update, and can't wait until its been better vetted. The porters do the best they can but can't test everything. but a real good question would be, why is there a not working/compiling update released to the ports tree Because it was just released and every combination of system configuration hasn't been tested, so there is some lag time before it stabilizes, especially with complicated software. There in lies the question -- why do you need to compile a port which was just released? Is it a security thing or is it I want the latest ? I'm just curious (and totally uninterested in how this ranks in your worse question list). -- Adam Strohl http://www.ateamsystems.com/ ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Pierre-Luc Drouin pldro...@pldrouin.net wrote: For me it is the lack of support for suspend/resume on laptops. I don't want to turn off my laptop when I am in the middle of doing something but need to put the laptop aside. I love using FreeBSD on servers, workstations and even a computer I have hooked to the TV at home for multimedia purpose, but not having suspend/resume working on my laptops is a major source of annoyance for me. So I have been trying various Linux distributions instead and I am currently using Gentoo, which is not that bad, although I find that system configuration and maintenance is always more painful with Linux than FreeBSD no matter the distribution I use... +1000. (I understand this may not be feasible given the number of developers, by the way) Steve ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
I think XOrg 7.2 or 7.3 or whatever was the straw that broke the camel's back for me, but it's just an example. Every time libjpeg or perl or python bumps the rev, I have to explain to my boss that I won't be using my computer for 48 hours. You can say don't follow the bleeding edge, but it seems like a weekly excersise that I need some port that wasn't built with a key option enabled, so pkg_add is really not an answer. If you have all the freetime in the world, reading /usr/ports/UPDATING back far enough will usually keep you out of trouble, but for a production system, it's a touch frustrating as soon as you touch the ports tree. That said, having been a linux user for a couple years now, I'm starting to think they are even worse: at least on F.B. you can rebuild the entire system in straightforward fashion if you do need an option that wasn't turned on, and go get a really big cup of coffee. The linux guys (or *buntu and derivatives at least) expect you never to upgrade a package/port unless you upgrade the whole OS (I think it was a ploy to get everyone locked-in to the abject failure that is gnome 3.0). I've got systems with 3-y.o. versions of everything on them, because there is no good way to upgrade an ap w/o upgrading the whole system, (at least past the couple of wannabe backports that they usually do the first year after a release. After that, you'd better really like the versions of everything that existed when you installed origonally.) That aside, you can clone a linux system with dpkg really really fast from a text list of previously installed packages (which is, however, unnecessary on freebsd because dump/restore works so well - never got it to clone a linux system into a functional state - so F.B wins again). So, conceptually and freedom-to-choose-wise, I prefer FreeBSD, it's just that mechanically, day-to-day, it has brought my capacity to use the computer effectively to a halt for such extended periods that I can't often justify it on the desktop. My server on the other hand has been running 7.x for years, and shows no sign of giving out. Just keep sticking new HDD's in periodically. For a server that you rarely add new apps to, it's stellar. Mind you, it's probably chock full of security holes due to it's age... I guess the bottom line is when it comes to package management, you can't have it all, and you can rarely even have very much, and OS guys really don't get much excitement from coding on pkg managers, so we're gonna all be out of luck indefinitely no matter the platform. Steve ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On 6/9/2012 3:34, Steve Franks wrote: Every time libjpeg or perl or python bumps the rev, I have to explain to my boss that I won't be using my computer for 48 hours. Why is this? And why are you updating every time there is a rev bump? It almost sounds like you're recompiling everything just for the heck of it, though I don't get how even that takes 48 hours. Even make buildworld is done in multi-user mode and so you could use your workstation during the build. And we're talking about ports here so ... Just curious! -- Adam Strohl http://www.ateamsystems.com/ ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
Phil Regnauld wrote: David Magda (dmagda) writes: On Jun 1, 2012, at 09:12, Phil Regnauld wrote: * Gluster For very large FSes, nothing beats it, especially now that 3.3 has been released. Isilon built their OneFS on top of FreeBSD, does that count? :) Panasas too IIRC. In the case of Panasas, I believe that they only provide a client driver for Linux to talk to their object storage appliance. There is an NFSv4.1 pNFS object layout that they have developed, but it requires an ODS2 (I think I got that right?) stack and it's unlikely that the client I am working on will be able to do this any time soon. rick Good pointers, thanks. It's still appliance, but good to know that FreeBSD is out there :) Phil ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
David Magda wrote: On Jun 1, 2012, at 21:03, Chris Nehren wrote: You say your'e using ZVOLs but then recommend gluster for large filesystems. I would like to take a moment to point out that one of the design goals of ZFS was to scale beyond the capabilities of current hardware. What does gluster do that ZFS does not? I'm not trying to troll here, but am genuinely curious about ZFS's shortfalls in one of the problem domains it seeks to address. ZFS is for storing file systems on locally connected block devices. Gluster is a network file system where data can be distributed over many nodes. So ZFS can ensure that bits-on-disk stay safe through checksums and mirroring / RAIDZ, while Gluster allows entire file servers to go offline and the files are still accessible because you have a kind of network-level RAID going on. This also helps in performance since instead of clients pounding on one file server (as usually happens with NFS), every write is sent to many data nodes so you're striping across many network elements. Think of it as NFS on steroids. A competitive open source equivalent would be Lustre, while Isilon and Panasas would probably be commercial alternatives (though they do NFS / CIFS on the 'front-end' and the distributed magic occurs on a 'back-end' network between the appliances). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GlusterFS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lustre_(file_system) Just fyi, someone is currently working on an NFSv4.1 pNFS layout type for Lustre. As such, once that layout is implemented, the NFSv4.1 client I am working on should be able to use a Lustre server cluster. So, it could be a while (next summer, maybe?), but that should be FreeBSD eventually. (I have no idea how easy porting of the Lustre server to FreeBSD would be?) Having said the above, I am not familiar with either Gluster or Lustre, so take the above as based on what little I currently know, rick ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
Am 06.06.2012 um 20:59 schrieb Dave Hayes: I believe this is the first time I've seen more documentation labeled as extraneous. :) I had thought to suggest an implementation by having a simple pkg-option-desr file which describes the options and implications in each port. Are you suggesting that such a file would be unwelcome? No, but take a look at the nginx port, which (I'm too lazy to count) has gained a couple of dozens of options over the years. It's a bit of an extreme example, I know - but nevertheless. I've enabled some that I know what they do and some where I think I know what they do. Some are default on, so I left them on. The rest I disabled if I knew I wouldn't ever need them. Documenting all of them would probably be a huge endeavor - and I'm glad that Sergey keeps the ports updated super-fast and chases down all the updates of 3rd-party patches (which often have little more than the source itself as documentation) etc. Asking him to do even more work - I wouldn't dare to do that ;-) It's really the person who is running make config who has to read up on all the options and decide if (s)he needs them. Sometimes, options only make sense in context of the selection of options of other ports and it thus may no be easily explainable in one line. I don't maintain any ports, I just build about 600 of them in our private tinderbox. IMO, you can't really maintain more than a couple of FreeBSD-servers professionally without some sort of central package-building. The earlier people realize this, the less pain they will have to suffer. In practice, you realize it 50 or 100 servers too late... The work that goes into the ports-tree is tremendous and once you start running your own tinderbox, maintain some 3rd-party patches yourself and just generally dig deeper into this stuff you begin to realize just how difficult this is. What I do (or try to do) on my tinderbox is to take a frozen ports-tree towards a release and build packages from it (trying to minimize the number of unique builds per portstree) After the tree is open again, I try to get the stuff that interests me, the security-patches (e.g. the recent php bug) or other stuff that is useful for us as an update directly from CVS for the 600 or so ports that we actually use. Of course, this only works until something in the ports-framework changes significantly (like that options-ng thing recently) and I either have to update the whole ports-tree or just wait till the next pre-release freeze. I found that currently the fastest way to update my packages on a server is to pkg_delete -fa and then pkg_add the stuff back that I need (more or less the same packages everywhere, anyway). Portupgrade is far too slow to be of any practical use (and more than a handful of package-management-tools in the ports-mgnt category isn't really helpful, either - who has the time to test them all?) I hope that pkgng will solve most of these problems and enable me to update my ports-tree more often. Unfortunately, by then some of the FreeBSD-servers will have moved into our private cloud (using Joyent's private cloud, which, incidentally uses NetBSD's pkgsrc - we will have to see how that works out longtime) Personally, I don't need more frequent FreeBSD-releases but two or maybe three ports-tree freezes per year would be good. So, FreeBSD 9.0-RELEASE, FreeBSD 9.0-U1, FreeBSD 9.0U2 would be cool ;-) Would that be a lot of additional work? ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
In message 1805884.wjzbqif...@x220.ovitrap.com, Erich writes: Hi, On 06 June 2012 0:42:47 Mark Andrews wrote: In message 1541214.zfrdxxb...@x220.ovitrap.com, Erich writes: Hi, On 05 June 2012 1:09:50 Mark Linimon wrote: On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 01:00:45PM +0700, Erich wrote: All of these, with the exception of HEAD (which is always a valid tag ), only apply to the src/ tree. The ports/, doc/, and www/ trees are not branched. If you create a branch, you must create a tag for that branch. However, you can create a tag without creating a branch. That is what is done for the ports tree. I found now the location where this information is missing for beginners. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/ports-using.htm l I simply cannot believe that beginners would expect this information to f ind this in the section for updating the kernel. Erich Because, while you believe it is better to roll back to the release point it really isn't. The ports tree is rarely broken for long. When it is broken people will tell you to roll back to a good date and give you the date to use. I've had to roll back a couple of times in 11+ years of updating and never to a release point. What is there is good advice. Use a up-to-date ports tree. If it is broken wait a days or so and try again. If it is still broken report the problem using send-pr. you will find thousands of notes that people should not run bleeding edge when it comes to the kernel. But people are forced to run bleeding edge on the ports. The kernel and ports are very different things. On the bleeding edge the kernel may not even boot and if it boots it may corrupt the entire disk requiring you to reinstall and recover from backups. Ports don't normally get added unless they build and run. Occasionally there are integration issues because one cannot test the billions if not trillions of possible port combinations. Remember almost every port is already released software that has already gone through alpha and beta testing. Those that arn't are clearly marked as such. The documentation than even states that there is no fall back. You state it as being just normal to wait for a week or more until the problem is solved. I cannot imagine that people who come to FreeBSD and get trapped somehow will stick to it then. If you report a bug to Oracle or Microsoft you won't get a fix within a week. It just doesn't happen unless you are paying very big dollars and might not happen even then as it can take weeks to find the cause of a bug even with a team working 7x24 to find it. They might will ask on this list just to learn that there is no help available. Just wait. People who have to make decisions what operating system should be used on their workplaces will not like this and stick with whatever they have. Yet there are plenty of places that do run FreeBSD. They understand the limitations and accept them. I believe that this is a very good user repellent. Remember you don't have to use the ports system. You can install software without using ports. The ports system just saves you time. Erich -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On 06.06.12 05:28, Erich wrote: Why should a normal user continue to search for a tag when the handbook is so clear on this? Erich I continue to wonder, why are you searching for tags on the ports tree, when you were told on a number of occasions that those who depend on particular state of the ports tree use DATE. There is not much point in tagging the ports tree, because it is never 'released' as such. You will end up with millions of tags and sorting out which one you need will become difficult. Further, you are not advised to use an not-current ports tree, unless you know exactly what you are doing. If you know what you are doing, you are not likely to ask questions like these. (*) The ports tree is a collection of instructions how to compile and install particular software on FreeBSD. Don't think of the ports tree in any other way. Daniel (*) I gave earlier the example of how BSDRP builds. It's build script pulls a version of the ports tree at certain date. Then compiles and installs a number of ports from there. The project uses a bunch of networking tools and nobody cares if the version of KDE, LibreOffice or the PNG library is broken in that particular version of the ports tree. They do care, great deal, if the version of net/quagga for example, in that particular ports tree version is broken. In any case, when pulling the ports tree, they do not care about any particular tag, but specify an date. The date, when the ports were tested to be ok. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On Jun 6, 2012 3:38 AM, Erich erichfreebsdl...@ovitrap.com wrote: Hi, On 05 June 2012 7:13:47 Mark Linimon wrote: On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 03:23:01PM +0700, Erich wrote: But is this true for apache only or for the whole ports tree? Entire tree. my problem with this is that the documentation states something very different: From the handbook at the location where beginners will look for it: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cvsup.html 'Which version(s) of them do you want? With CVSup, you can receive virtually any version of the sources that ever existed. That is possible because the cvsupd server works directly from the CVS repository, which contains all of the versions. You specify which one of them you want using the tag= and date= value fields. Warning: Be very careful to specify any tag= fields correctly. Some tags are valid only for certain collections of files. If you specify an incorrect or misspelled tag, CVSup will delete files which you probably do not want deleted. In particular, use only tag=. for the ports-* collections.' I think that this states very clearly that there are no tags. No it doesn't. It states clearly that you shouldn't use tags unless you know what you are doing, as several of us have explained more than once. Chris ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
* O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de [2012-06-03 22:55 +0200]: ... I spent now two complete days watching my boxes updating their ports. Several ports do not compile anymore (inkscape, libreoffice, libxul, to name some of the very hurting ones!). Do you have graphics/libwpg01 installed? After deinstalling this, I was able to compile inkscape again. Nicolas -- http://www.rachinsky.de/nicolas ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
port graphics/inkscape: not compiling anymore WAS: Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On 06/06/12 10:41, Nicolas Rachinsky wrote: * O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de [2012-06-03 22:55 +0200]: ... I spent now two complete days watching my boxes updating their ports. Several ports do not compile anymore (inkscape, libreoffice, libxul, to name some of the very hurting ones!). Do you have graphics/libwpg01 installed? After deinstalling this, I was able to compile inkscape again. Nicolas Yes, this port is installed and it is required by a lot of ports I have installed. I will not deinstall this port since I fear it will not be able to be reinstalled after that and increase the mess as it is already. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Hi, let me rite the answer on top before my mouse scrolling down. I am fully aware of what you are writing. I am saying this from the point of view people have when they start with FreeBSD. This little help would make them feel much much saver. I know that it would not change much in real life. Erich On 06 June 2012 16:45:03 Mark Andrews wrote: In message 1805884.wjzbqif...@x220.ovitrap.com, Erich writes: ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Hi, On 06 June 2012 8:48:10 Chris Rees wrote: On Jun 6, 2012 3:38 AM, Erich erichfreebsdl...@ovitrap.com wrote: No it doesn't. It states clearly that you shouldn't use tags unless you know what you are doing, as several of us have explained more than once. is my English really this bad? From the handbook: '. In particular, use only tag=. for the ports-* collections.' Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On 6 June 2012 14:12, Erich erichfreebsdl...@ovitrap.com wrote: Hi, On 06 June 2012 8:48:10 Chris Rees wrote: On Jun 6, 2012 3:38 AM, Erich erichfreebsdl...@ovitrap.com wrote: No it doesn't. It states clearly that you shouldn't use tags unless you know what you are doing, as several of us have explained more than once. is my English really this bad? From the handbook: '. In particular, use only tag=. for the ports-* collections.' Your English is fine, but being told to use tag=. != tag=. is the only tag that exists. Chris ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
Daniel Kalchev dan...@digsys.bg writes: On 04.06.12 22:32, Dave Hayes wrote: That's a fair position. Perhaps it would not be too much trouble to add this one idea to optionsng: a more info field on each option knob which may be filled in by a port maintainer. The pkg-descr file in the port already contains link to the software's origin. The various options the software has are or should be described there. We definitely don't want the ports cluttered with extraneous and sometimes out of date (and thus misleading) information. I'm describing more of a use case here, not attempting to specify an implementation. If a user invokes 'make', a window is presented to them with various options. It's probably very common that this is met with an initial reaction of what the hell do these do?, even from the most seasoned of admins (presuming they are unfamiliar with the software they have been asked to install). I claim it would be an improvement to have that information at the fingertips of the make invoker. I believe this is the first time I've seen more documentation labeled as extraneous. :) I had thought to suggest an implementation by having a simple pkg-option-desr file which describes the options and implications in each port. Are you suggesting that such a file would be unwelcome? I have built many ports for many years. IIRC I've seen the option descriptions you mention in pkg-descr maybe 0.1% of the time. (That's my sense, not a measured objective number.) Usually I have to go digging through the Makefile, then the source to find these answers. In all case, compiling from source is not for those having no clue what they do. ... you need to make informed decisions on options yourself. If this is beyond you (and not you personally), ... Since it is very likely that you interpret this as yet another elitist comment, Actually, I hadn't thought of this conceptual linkage until you suggested it here. :) Still, you are quite correct. The likelihood of anyone interpreting your position as 'elitist' from these comments is high. I will, of course, not interpret them that way. If this is beyond you (and not you personally), then by all means use pre-packaged software in binary form. Heh. Even this idea is beyond most normal users, who should likely use PC-BSD or Ubuntu. In responding in this thread, I was thinking of the reasonably clued system admin level users when I said users. As an SA, in many situations, you aren't able to have fun digging for information. It's much easier to have the answers right here in front of you. I know if I ever committed a port, I would quite likely spend the extra five minutes to put option documentation in a number of places, even if this angered some of the more anal of the community. elsewhere or apparently, you don't want the number of FreeBSD users to grow. Then you waste everyone's time -- that could be spent on answering other people's stupid questions. I see. Personally, I believe this way: It is the responsibility of the responder to determine whether their response is a waste of time or not. Blaming anyone else other than you (the generic 'you', not you personally) for the inappropriate use of your time should only really happen in an employment or indentured servitude relationship; certainly not on a mailing list. :) Given that the FreeBSD wants more users idea is repeatedly brought up on lists (at least this is my impression), I would presume that the subject of 'more users' is somewhat relevant to some people; one look at the subject of this thread should be enough to demonstrate relevance. -- Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - d...@jetcafe.org The opinions expressed above are entirely my own Implementation: (n.) The fruitless struggle by the talented and underpaid to fulfill promises made by the rich and ignorant ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On Tue, 5 Jun 2012, Mark Linimon wrote: It's not particularly easy to see this on cvsweb. But let's take a look at a random Mk/bsd.*.mk file via 'cvs log': RCS file: /home/FreeBSD/pcvs/ports/Mk/bsd.apache.mk,v Working file: bsd.apache.mk head: 1.36 branch: locks: strict access list: symbolic names: RELEASE_8_3_0: 1.35 RELEASE_9_0_0: 1.33 RELEASE_7_4_0: 1.26 RELEASE_8_2_0: 1.26 RELEASE_6_EOL: 1.26 [...] RELEASE_6_1_0: 1.9 RELEASE_5_5_0: 1.9 [...] and so forth. The line RELEASE_8_3_0: 1.35 tells you the version of this file as of tag RELEASE_8_3_0 was r1.35. So that's what's on the 8.3R distribution media. Is there any way to access this information using tools like pkg_* pkgng or ports make targets? Or does one use cvs/svn? ps: Thanks all for your work on ports! ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Ports from a particular date in the past... Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On 06/07/2012 00:16, Chris Rees wrote: On 6 June 2012 14:12, Ericherichfreebsdl...@ovitrap.com wrote: [..] is my English really this bad? From the handbook: '. In particular, use only tag=. for the ports-* collections.' Your English is fine, but being told to use tag=. != tag=. is the only tag that exists. Another data point: In Erich's defense, I'd say his interpretation is quite understandable. ...use only tag=. for the ports-* collections also left me with the distinct impression (some many moons in the past) that there are no other meaningful (or safe) tags when csup'ing the Ports tree. In 12 years of using FreeBSD I've never really sought out Erich's use case (viz. roll back /usr/ports to some past known-good version), I just assumed it wasn't possible. So this thread has taught at least one person (me) a new thing -- I never fully grokked that adding date= to the supfile could achieve this desired result when csup'ing the Ports tree. Now I know, and I've changed the Subject line of this email in the hope it helps some future soul googling for the answer. cheers, gja ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Ports from a particular date in the past... Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
I, for one, appreciate you changing the subject because I didn't know this either and its an important function in my use case where point in time snapshots are important to the architects and ops folks! On 6/6/12, grenville armitage garmit...@swin.edu.au wrote: On 06/07/2012 00:16, Chris Rees wrote: On 6 June 2012 14:12, Ericherichfreebsdl...@ovitrap.com wrote: [..] is my English really this bad? From the handbook: '. In particular, use only tag=. for the ports-* collections.' Your English is fine, but being told to use tag=. != tag=. is the only tag that exists. Another data point: In Erich's defense, I'd say his interpretation is quite understandable. ...use only tag=. for the ports-* collections also left me with the distinct impression (some many moons in the past) that there are no other meaningful (or safe) tags when csup'ing the Ports tree. In 12 years of using FreeBSD I've never really sought out Erich's use case (viz. roll back /usr/ports to some past known-good version), I just assumed it wasn't possible. So this thread has taught at least one person (me) a new thing -- I never fully grokked that adding date= to the supfile could achieve this desired result when csup'ing the Ports tree. Now I know, and I've changed the Subject line of this email in the hope it helps some future soul googling for the answer. cheers, gja ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- Sent from my mobile device Take care Rick Miller ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Ports from a particular date in the past... Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On 6 Jun 2012, at 23:10, grenville armitage garmit...@swin.edu.au wrote: On 06/07/2012 00:16, Chris Rees wrote: On 6 June 2012 14:12, Ericherichfreebsdl...@ovitrap.com wrote: [..] is my English really this bad? From the handbook: '. In particular, use only tag=. for the ports-* collections.' Your English is fine, but being told to use tag=. != tag=. is the only tag that exists. Another data point: In Erich's defense, I'd say his interpretation is quite understandable. ...use only tag=. for the ports-* collections also left me with the distinct impression (some many moons in the past) that there are no other meaningful (or safe) tags when csup'ing the Ports tree. In 12 years of using FreeBSD I've never really sought out Erich's use case (viz. roll back /usr/ports to some past known-good version), I just assumed it wasn't possible. So this thread has taught at least one person (me) a new thing -- I never fully grokked that adding date= to the supfile could achieve this desired result when csup'ing the Ports tree. Now I know, and I've changed the Subject line of this email in the hope it helps some future soul googling for the answer. cheers, gja Actually does , flagging post for future reading. Thanks guys. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Ports from a particular date in the past... Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Hi, On 06 June 2012 17:40:28 Rick Miller wrote: I, for one, appreciate you changing the subject because I didn't know this either and its an important function in my use case where point in time snapshots are important to the architects and ops folks! and it should be mentioned in the hand book. I did not get any response for this on the proper mailing list. On 6/6/12, grenville armitage garmit...@swin.edu.au wrote: In Erich's defense, I'd say his interpretation is quite understandable. ...use only tag=. for the ports-* collections also left me with the distinct impression (some many moons in the past) that there are no other meaningful (or safe) tags when csup'ing the Ports tree. This is why I tried then to get the ports tree from the release by hand or by synchronising with the release and store it. In 12 years of using FreeBSD I've never really sought out Erich's use case (viz. roll back /usr/ports to some past known-good version), I just assumed it wasn't possible. So this thread has taught at least one person (me) a new thing -- I never fully grokked that adding date= to the supfile could achieve this desired result when csup'ing the Ports tree. Now I know, and I've changed the Subject line of this email in the hope it helps some future soul googling for the answer. The real answer would be to put this into the handbook. Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Hi, On 05 June 2012 15:33:16 Mark Andrews wrote: In message 2490439.ec638ti...@x220.ovitrap.com, Erich writes: Hi, On 05 June 2012 12:48:20 Mark Andrews wrote: In message 3506767.fvm2kmt...@x220.ovitrap.com, Erich writes: On 05 June 2012 11:24:25 Mark Andrews wrote: It's already there. If you want the ports as of FreeBSD 4.x EOL then the tag is RELEASE_4_EOL. If you want ports as of FreeBSD 9.0 then the tag is RELEASE_9_9_0. I did not know this. Do you have a link for this? I never read about it. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cvs-tags.html All of these, with the exception of HEAD (which is always a valid tag), only apply to the src/ tree. The ports/, doc/, and www/ trees are not branched. I understand this that I can use these tags on the FreeBSD sources but not on the ports. I never tried this on the ports. Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 12:18:33PM +0700, Erich wrote: I did not know this. Do you have a link for this? I never read about it. The EOL announcements have them. I don't think the release announcements do, however. mcl ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On 04.06.12 22:32, Dave Hayes wrote: Chris Nehrenapeiron+freebsd-sta...@isuckatdomains.net writes: The descriptions of the options assume the admin is familiar with the software they're installing. I do not think it is the FreeBSD Project's purview to document every option for every port. At the very least it'd take quite a lot of time and effort to document all of that. That's a fair position. Perhaps it would not be too much trouble to add this one idea to optionsng: a more info field on each option knob which may be filled in by a port maintainer. The pkg-descr file in the port already contains link to the software's origin. The various options the software has are or should be described there. We definitely don't want the ports cluttered with extraneous and sometimes out of date (and thus misleading) information. Beyond this, such explanations would duplicate each port's own documentation. Not necessarily. I don't have an example offhand, but I suspect there are a number of FreeBSD specific option knobs applied to ports. There are in a way, and all of them are pretty much generic. Like WITHOUT_X11, WITH_CUPS etc. The purpose of these options is to more or less define the environment in which the port is intended to be used. For example, on a head-less server you most definitely want to build (say) php5 with WITHOUT_X11 in order to not pull unnecessary X11 related pieces. The intent of such options is to go to make.conf. These options are for convenience however. You can set each port's options individually. In all case, compiling from source is not for those having no clue what they do. The ports infrastructure in FreeBSD is already doing the hard work to port the software to your OS, you need to make informed decisions on options yourself. If this is beyond you (and not you personally), then by all means use pre-packaged software in binary form. Since it is very likely that you interpret this as yet another elitist comment, let's make it clear: anyone is welcome to ask for help with FreeBSD and ports (in the proper mailing list as to not create much noise and get negative response). Nobody is obliged to provide any help on anything. Nevertheless, the FreeBSD users are great community and you are often getting help even for the most stupid questions. Except when you start with name calling, or insist if you don't help me, I will go elsewhere or apparently, you don't want the number of FreeBSD users to grow. Then you waste everyone's time -- that could be spent on answering other people's stupid questions. Daniel Daniel ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 01:00:45PM +0700, Erich wrote: All of these, with the exception of HEAD (which is always a valid tag), only apply to the src/ tree. The ports/, doc/, and www/ trees are not branched. If you create a branch, you must create a tag for that branch. However, you can create a tag without creating a branch. That is what is done for the ports tree. It's not particularly easy to see this on cvsweb. But let's take a look at a random Mk/bsd.*.mk file via 'cvs log': RCS file: /home/FreeBSD/pcvs/ports/Mk/bsd.apache.mk,v Working file: bsd.apache.mk head: 1.36 branch: locks: strict access list: symbolic names: RELEASE_8_3_0: 1.35 RELEASE_9_0_0: 1.33 RELEASE_7_4_0: 1.26 RELEASE_8_2_0: 1.26 RELEASE_6_EOL: 1.26 [...] RELEASE_6_1_0: 1.9 RELEASE_5_5_0: 1.9 keyword substitution: kv total revisions: 36;selected revisions: 36 description: revision 1.36 date: 2012/05/23 08:17:48; author: miwi; state: Exp; lines: +2 -2 - Remove emacs mode, -*- mode: ...; -*- [1] - Comments for BUILD_ and RUN_DEPENDS fail to mention alternate means to specify dependencie [2] - Fix make reinstall [3] - Trivial comment change for PORTDATA [4] [...] and so forth. The line RELEASE_8_3_0: 1.35 tells you the version of this file as of tag RELEASE_8_3_0 was r1.35. So that's what's on the 8.3R distribution media. mcl ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On 05.06.12 07:33, Zane C. B-H. wrote: [on Exchange wiping devices] From a enterprise perspective, it makes sense. Lets say a device goes missing, it allows one to wipe it the next time it calls home. This is supposed to be handled by the device management software. Not by your e-mail server. Because it does not belong to the mail server, this is why you will not find this functionality implemented in any open mail server or calendaring or groupware software. As you involved enterprise and your previous statement on Apple, they surprisingly do have such device deployment and management solution. You can either use their own Apple Configurator, or any third party MDM as described in http://www.apple.com/ipad/business/integration/mdm/. I would not call this technique proprietary. Ok, it only works on iOS ;) The usefulness of such a feature is better disconnected from the debate of proprietary v. non-proprietary though, given the different nature of both issues. With this I fully agree. I hope you too agree, than when you disconnect the e-mail handling features of Exchange, from the lock-in technology Microsoft integrated there (ActiveSync), Exchange is no different than any other non-proprietary mail server. The point here is that in order to have more freedom, one has to set expectations and setups right, from the begining. Separate the MDM and e-mail functionality and you are no longer locked with Microsoft or anyone. You can easily replace each component of your system and use the best software for the task. Not make compromises. Daniel PS: Yes, I don't like Microsoft's offerings. I understand why they do this, but this doesn't mean I agree and since I have plenty of other choices... I prefer the best. My enterprise(s) have been running on BSD UNIX for good over 20 years now. No Microsoft stuff. Not needed, not missed. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Hi, On 05 June 2012 1:01:37 Mark Linimon wrote: On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 12:18:33PM +0700, Erich wrote: I did not know this. Do you have a link for this? I never read about it. The EOL announcements have them. I don't think the release announcements do, however. this is the problem. I would like to be able to go back to the last release in case of a problem and restart from there. When it is possible to tag the EOL, it should be as easy to tag the SOL (start of life). This would save a lot of time for many people. Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Hi, On 05 June 2012 1:09:50 Mark Linimon wrote: On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 01:00:45PM +0700, Erich wrote: All of these, with the exception of HEAD (which is always a valid tag), only apply to the src/ tree. The ports/, doc/, and www/ trees are not branched. If you create a branch, you must create a tag for that branch. However, you can create a tag without creating a branch. That is what is done for the ports tree. It's not particularly easy to see this on cvsweb. But let's take a look at a random Mk/bsd.*.mk file via 'cvs log': here we are. I never found this. RCS file: /home/FreeBSD/pcvs/ports/Mk/bsd.apache.mk,v Working file: bsd.apache.mk head: 1.36 branch: locks: strict access list: symbolic names: RELEASE_8_3_0: 1.35 RELEASE_9_0_0: 1.33 RELEASE_7_4_0: 1.26 RELEASE_8_2_0: 1.26 RELEASE_6_EOL: 1.26 [...] RELEASE_6_1_0: 1.9 RELEASE_5_5_0: 1.9 If this list would make it into the documentation, all I asked would be already there. I could write this but my English will need some corrections. If you could give a link to how to do this properly, I would do it then. But is this true for apache only or for the whole ports tree? Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On Jun 5, 2012 3:07 AM, Erich erichfreebsdl...@ovitrap.com wrote: Hi, On 05 June 2012 11:24:25 Mark Andrews wrote: Version tagging is just a convient way to get a snapshot at a particular point in time unless you create branches that are them we do not ask for more. There should be only one difference to a snapshot. As snapshot has a date. No matter in what state the ports tree was, it is in that state in the ports tree. If user - especially the one not so fit in this aspect - want to use a snapshot, it will be difficult to impossible to figure out which one they need. If version numbers would be introduced, it would be ok to use the version number of the FreeBSD and have only version available which reflect the release version of the ports tree. People here want to make always a perfect system. People like me want to have some small things in there available with a click. As the ports trees are there anyway, only the direct link to the snapshot of that day or a version number in the ports tree would be needed to make this available for people who just want to use FreeBSD. Please note, I do not want any extra work spend here to make this perfect. I only want a simple way to fall back to a big net which is not that old from which the user can restart. I and most others will purposely refuse to document this in any official capacity, but I'll give you a hint. Look for the date tag in man csup. Chris ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 03:23:01PM +0700, Erich wrote: But is this true for apache only or for the whole ports tree? Entire tree. mcl ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Hi, On 05 June 2012 1:09:50 Mark Linimon wrote: On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 01:00:45PM +0700, Erich wrote: All of these, with the exception of HEAD (which is always a valid tag), only apply to the src/ tree. The ports/, doc/, and www/ trees are not branched. If you create a branch, you must create a tag for that branch. However, you can create a tag without creating a branch. That is what is done for the ports tree. I found now the location where this information is missing for beginners. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/ports-using.html I simply cannot believe that beginners would expect this information to find this in the section for updating the kernel. Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: 2) Disk and network I/O issues under load. We realized that FreeBSD has some issues in multithreaded environments. Even on 6/12 or 12/24 core/thread systems, under heavy load (especially network and CPU load), disk I/O was (is?) poor. This is a no-go in a HPC environment. This got a lot better when I switched to native AHCI mode for SATA disks. You have to have a fairly recent mainboard; my workstation at the office (about 3 years old) doesn't support AHCI mode yet. 4) The lack of clustering capabilities. The lack of a clustered filesystem grows more and more important in the area of HPC, where storage systems get spread over a department. Yes, a clustered file system would be very useful to have, even outside the HPC area. Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
In message 1541214.zfrdxxb...@x220.ovitrap.com, Erich writes: Hi, On 05 June 2012 1:09:50 Mark Linimon wrote: On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 01:00:45PM +0700, Erich wrote: All of these, with the exception of HEAD (which is always a valid tag), only apply to the src/ tree. The ports/, doc/, and www/ trees are not branched. If you create a branch, you must create a tag for that branch. However, you can create a tag without creating a branch. That is what is done for the ports tree. I found now the location where this information is missing for beginners. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/ports-using.html I simply cannot believe that beginners would expect this information to find this in the section for updating the kernel. Erich Because, while you believe it is better to roll back to the release point it really isn't. The ports tree is rarely broken for long. When it is broken people will tell you to roll back to a good date and give you the date to use. I've had to roll back a couple of times in 11+ years of updating and never to a release point. What is there is good advice. Use a up-to-date ports tree. If it is broken wait a days or so and try again. If it is still broken report the problem using send-pr. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com wrote: The current status is that we support 8.x and 9.x well. Ports support for 7.x is starting to fade over time as new upstream releases rely on newer APIs. 6.x went EOL 11/30/2010 and we no longer claim to support it in ports. FWIW ... In fact, I can confirm that the ports don't support 6.x anymore since last week. :-) # cd /usr/ports/dns/bind96 # make No closing parenthesis in archive specification /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.options.mk, line 177: Error in archive specification: WITH_ No closing parenthesis in archive specification /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.options.mk, line 177: Error in archive specification: WITH_ make: fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue Best regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd C++ is the only current language making COBOL look good. -- Bertrand Meyer ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Look at the comment of the maintainer of LibreOffice ... btw I tested and libreoffice is still working as expected. Most of the time the libreoffice failures is from people tuning their system without knowing the impact/risk of doing such, for example building some c++ libraries with g++47 let's imagine cppunit or anyother library depended on by libreoffice, and building libreoffice with clang (which is default) and using the libstdc++ from base (which also is default) and the mix of libstdc++ is producing tons of problems. problem i can't fix. regards, Bapt pgp9XqKXJF7QQ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 20:57:52 +0200, Thomas David Rivers riv...@dignus.com wrote: We used to have FreeBSD exclusively on desktops... Now, we have migrated to other desktops (mac) with FreeBSD running the build and file server... Why? Because - the mac updates itself! No pain, no installation, no keeping-up with mailing lists/announcements, just click and its done. Mac OS has a nice X11 server, the Mac UI is good enough, you don't have to install/update anything, the app store is perfect for downloading/installing whatever a desktop user might need. It was just too alluring... So, FreeBSD runs our NFS file server, and we log into a larger FreeBSD machine to do builds, etc... but, the desktop has moved. One developer here uses Linux Debian for about the same reason, it's trivial to update (via the network) to new versions, etc... Our web site used to be FreeBSD-based, but it was just too cost-effective to get a virtual Linux box on the backbone and move everything to that. Our requirements aren't too big, so that works beautifully. There _are_ people doing virtual FreeBSD boxes in a similar fashion, but they were quote a lot more for the annual fee.. so, Linux it was... I suppose, in some sense, you could argue that MacOS is FreeBSD... - Dave Rivers - Have you already tried pc-bsd? http://www.pcbsd.org/ FreeBSD with easy install and auto-update. Ronald. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Hi, On 05 June 2012 1:09:50 Mark Linimon wrote: On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 01:00:45PM +0700, Erich wrote: All of these, with the exception of HEAD (which is always a valid tag), only apply to the src/ tree. The ports/, doc/, and www/ trees are not branched. If you create a branch, you must create a tag for that branch. However, you can create a tag without creating a branch. That is what is done for the ports tree. I found now the point in which all normal users will give up: The handbook states this: Which version(s) of them do you want? 'With CVSup, you can receive virtually any version of the sources that ever existed. That is possible because the cvsupd server works directly from the CVS repository, which contains all of the versions. You specify which one of them you want using the tag= and date= value fields. Warning: Be very careful to specify any tag= fields correctly. Some tags are valid only for certain collections of files. If you specify an incorrect or misspelled tag, CVSup will delete files which you probably do not want deleted. In particular, use only tag=. for the ports-* collections.' Why should a normal user continue to search for a tag when the handbook is so clear on this? Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Hi, On 05 June 2012 7:13:47 Mark Linimon wrote: On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 03:23:01PM +0700, Erich wrote: But is this true for apache only or for the whole ports tree? Entire tree. my problem with this is that the documentation states something very different: From the handbook at the location where beginners will look for it: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cvsup.html 'Which version(s) of them do you want? With CVSup, you can receive virtually any version of the sources that ever existed. That is possible because the cvsupd server works directly from the CVS repository, which contains all of the versions. You specify which one of them you want using the tag= and date= value fields. Warning: Be very careful to specify any tag= fields correctly. Some tags are valid only for certain collections of files. If you specify an incorrect or misspelled tag, CVSup will delete files which you probably do not want deleted. In particular, use only tag=. for the ports-* collections.' I think that this states very clearly that there are no tags. So, after we learned that every thing I am asking is there anyway in an official and supported way, only the documentation has to be changed. Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Hi, On 06 June 2012 0:42:47 Mark Andrews wrote: In message 1541214.zfrdxxb...@x220.ovitrap.com, Erich writes: Hi, On 05 June 2012 1:09:50 Mark Linimon wrote: On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 01:00:45PM +0700, Erich wrote: All of these, with the exception of HEAD (which is always a valid tag), only apply to the src/ tree. The ports/, doc/, and www/ trees are not branched. If you create a branch, you must create a tag for that branch. However, you can create a tag without creating a branch. That is what is done for the ports tree. I found now the location where this information is missing for beginners. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/ports-using.html I simply cannot believe that beginners would expect this information to find this in the section for updating the kernel. Erich Because, while you believe it is better to roll back to the release point it really isn't. The ports tree is rarely broken for long. When it is broken people will tell you to roll back to a good date and give you the date to use. I've had to roll back a couple of times in 11+ years of updating and never to a release point. What is there is good advice. Use a up-to-date ports tree. If it is broken wait a days or so and try again. If it is still broken report the problem using send-pr. you will find thousands of notes that people should not run bleeding edge when it comes to the kernel. But people are forced to run bleeding edge on the ports. The documentation than even states that there is no fall back. You state it as being just normal to wait for a week or more until the problem is solved. I cannot imagine that people who come to FreeBSD and get trapped somehow will stick to it then. They might will ask on this list just to learn that there is no help available. Just wait. People who have to make decisions what operating system should be used on their workplaces will not like this and stick with whatever they have. I believe that this is a very good user repellent. Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
In message 3851080.jqjobqx...@x220.ovitrap.com, Erich writes: yes, you miss a very simple thing. Updated this morning your ports tree. Your client asks for something for Monday morning for which you need now a program which needs some kind of PNG but you did not install it. It seems to me that you are missing a number of aspects and options of how you do configuration control on a system, if you think the ports collection is your only tool. Take a peek at src/tools/tools/sysbuild for instance. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On 04/06/2012 00:30, Mark Andrews wrote: The ports system defaults are to use a common build/runtime tree but at the cost of a little more disk space each major application could have its own build/runtime tree. This is a tradeoff. Most of the time having a shared set of libraries is a win, but just occasionally, it is a big pain. That's PC-BSD .pbi format in a nutshell. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com writes: On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 07:24:11PM -0700, Dave Hayes wrote: I see features and pkgng and things being offered up as solutions... these are all well and good, but in my opinion more comprehensive documentation and support in these areas would do more good than pkgng. IMHO pkgng and optionsng are necessary, but not sufficient, to solve our current problems. Optionsng is nice, but lacking in documentation. Is it too much to ask port maintainers to write a bit more documentation on the options they are providing? -- Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - d...@jetcafe.org The opinions expressed above are entirely my own Sunshine proves it's own existence. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On 03.06.12 07:24, Erich wrote: isn't this what I just suggested to be done by the team? Give the ports tree a new version number and people can fall back to this then. Isn't this solution too simple to be done? As was mentioned earlier in this discussion, by virtue of the ports tree being hosted on CVS, you are able to get a version of the ports there at any date you chose. Just set PORTS_DATE=date=2012.06.01.00.00.00 to get the ports tree as it was on midnight 1st of June 2012. You can specify hours, minutes, seconds if you need. Way more powerful than any version number thing. As you can see, this is already available with FreeBSD. A lot more hidden gems are available with FreeBSD. People are just lazy and for the most part, refuse to learn. This is one aspect FreeBSD could benefit greatly from more education of the 'users' -- just because it has way more hidden gems than anything else around. Daniel ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Daniel Kalchev dan...@digsys.bg wrote: On 03.06.12 07:24, Erich wrote: isn't this what I just suggested to be done by the team? Give the ports tree a new version number and people can fall back to this then. Isn't this solution too simple to be done? As was mentioned earlier in this discussion, by virtue of the ports tree being hosted on CVS, you are able to get a version of the ports there at any date you chose. Just set PORTS_DATE=date=2012.06.01.00.00.00 to get the ports tree as it was on midnight 1st of June 2012. You can specify hours, minutes, seconds if you need. Way more powerful than any version number thing. As you can see, this is already available with FreeBSD. A lot more hidden gems are available with FreeBSD. People are just lazy and for the most part, refuse to learn. This is one aspect FreeBSD could benefit greatly from more education of the 'users' -- just because it has way more hidden gems than anything else around. Indeed. And educating users means providing them with appropriate documentation. So how about adding a section to the Handbook with a list of hidden gems? Something like Dru Lavigne's BSD Hacks perhaps? Daniel Regards, -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Jun 4, 2012 9:50 AM, Dave Hayes d...@jetcafe.org wrote: Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com writes: On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 07:24:11PM -0700, Dave Hayes wrote: I see features and pkgng and things being offered up as solutions... these are all well and good, but in my opinion more comprehensive documentation and support in these areas would do more good than pkgng. IMHO pkgng and optionsng are necessary, but not sufficient, to solve our current problems. Optionsng is nice, but lacking in documentation. Is it too much to ask port maintainers to write a bit more documentation on the options they are providing? Where are you looking? I updated the Porter's Handbook- is there something missing? Chris ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On 04.06.12 05:24, Dave Hayes wrote: Anyway, given my workload, it will probably take me a man week to get two virtualized test servers. Someone I know with a vmware gui and windows is doing this in 15 minutes (and that's being careful). Just my $0.02. You are unfortunately comparing apples with oranges here. If you want true comparison, compare how fast you will have VirtualBox OSE up and running on both FreeBSD and Windows. Both of you start with a system where it has to be compiled and installed. I guess your Windows friend will stop at compiler? what?. You can't get the source code of vmware and compile it yourself, of course.. that's just another little detail. Not the same? They get the thing pre-compiled? So could you. Thing is, once you go trough the trouble to install VirtualBox on FreeBSD you get a lot more usable vrtualization platform, with things like ZFS that aren't going to be available on Windows. It was mentioned a number of times already, that if you want to run binary only you would be better with PC-BSD -- and system based on FreeBSD (so it has most, but not all of the goodies), and someone else pre-compiles and pre-packages software for you. Just one click install. So, if you used PC-BSD, you could have had VirtualBox running perhaps for the same time an Windows user would. There is place for binary-only systems and systems where you are able to rebuild everything from source. FreeBSD tends to focus on the later while various folk (like PC-BSD) use the great FreeBSD platform to offer easier to use binary only systems. Of course, you could use the FreeBSD ports tree and build from source on PC-BSD too. Daniel ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 05:03:26AM -0700, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote: Dear All , There is a thread Why Are You Using FreeBSD ? Hello, I'm using FreeBSD for most of my tasks and servers and i think it's great, but this things could be improved: - Good FUSE support. On the desktop side, you can't use NTFS for write access. On the server side, you miss things like Gluster. You can't run things like truecrypt because they need it and things like geli/gbde doesn't work on anything but FreeBSD. Ie: FUSE is needed for interoperability. - Easier way to replicate FreeBSD infrastructure. I've found that maintain 1 server on FreeBSD is great. Requires lower maintenance that any other operating system. Once you start managing 20 or 30 things change. Suddenly you find yourself needing automated package building because ports are not versioned, so you must copy the repo, maintain local patches and build a tinderbox. If you find problems on a FreeBSD version and need patches you need to build a freebsd-update server to still use it, or start maintaining servers on two different ways: source and binary, which just adds testing time. Would be better if you could switch from source to binary and back in a easier way. - Hardware support. If you want to build a server on new atom boards, you will have problems, eg: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=amd64/166639 Same with laptop and other kind of hardware. Not just on computers, but also on peripherals. AFAIK no single all-in-one printer works fully with FreeBSD, so it's hard to configure as print/scan server. - I/O performance: If you do heavy I/O, the system becomes unresponsive. I've read a few days ago on the lists that it was a problem related to priorizing writes over reads and the recommendation was to use gsched, but haven't had time to check. Regards. Victor. -- La prueba más fehaciente de que existe vida inteligente en otros planetas, es que no han intentado contactar con nosotros. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
RE: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
-Original Message- From: owner-freebsd-sta...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- sta...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Kalchev Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2012 12:42 AM I really see no reason why your 'mail or calendaring server' should be able to wipe your devices.. This is the sort of bloat that keeps me away. From Microsoft products. I don't think that's fair to say. Email/calendaring seems to be the only connection point between a smartphone and an organization for at least the current crop of devices (although I'm sure that at some point soon, you'll be able to include organizational file servers as well). Even if you're just a SOHO or SMB, you should want to be able to locate or remotely wipe a device that's stolen, if only to ensure that someone doesn't have access to potentially sensitive personal information. Oh and by the way, not only do the Windows phones feature this, but so do the iPhones and the Android handsets - so this isn't just Microsoft. In this regard I rather prefer the way Apple handles things. Shiny wrapper interface to pretty much generic technology. No reinvention of the wheel and experiments to see if it can be made square. You can't damn Microsoft for being too proprietary in one paragraph and then praise Apple for its openness in the next. Does not compute. Best wishes, Matthew -- I FIGHT FOR THE USERS ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On 3 June 2012 21:55, O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: On 06/03/12 15:29, Erich wrote: Hi, On 03 June 2012 PM 5:14:10 Adam Strohl wrote: On 6/3/2012 11:14, Erich wrote: 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? I feel like I'm missing something. Why would you ever want to go back to an old version of the ports tree? You're ignoring tons of security issues! ... I think the PNG update isn't a security issue. And for not being a security issue, it triggered an inadequate mess! And if a port build is broken then the maintainer needs to fix it, that is the solution. Look at the comment of the maintainer of LibreOffice ... I must be missing something else here, it just seems like the underlying need for this is misguided (and dangerous from a security perspective). yes, you miss a very simple thing. Updated this morning your ports tree. Your client asks for something for Monday morning for which you need now a program which needs some kind of PNG but you did not install it. ... I spent now two complete days watching my boxes updating their ports. Several ports do not compile anymore (inkscape, libreoffice, libxul, to name some of the very hurting ones!). Do you have a machine that is fast enough to upgrade all your ports and still finish what your client needs Monday morning? Even my fastest box, a brand new 6 core Sandy-Bridge-E, wasn't capable of compiling all the ports in due time. Several ports requested attendance, several, as mentioned, didn't compile out of the blue. The ports tree is not broken as such. Only the installation gets broken in some sense. Have a version number there would allow people to go back to the last known working ports tree, install the software - or whatever has to be done - with a working system. Of course, the next step will be an upgrade. But only after the work which brings in the money is done. You do not face this problem on Windows. You can run a 10 year old 'kernel' and still install modern software. Erich I like having a very modern system with the most recent software. But in some cases, like these days with the PNG, FreeBSD's ports becomes again a problem. There is no convenient way to downgrade or allow the user/admin managing how to deal with the load of updates. You can't have both. As has been repeatedly explained to you, you should not expect an easy life with the very latest of software. Either stick to releases, or put up with lots of compiling etc-- you should not complain because of self-inflicted problems. Please remember that we do compile packages for release, or if more up to date packages are required you can use the stable package sets which are rarely over five days or so. Chris ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On 04.06.12 18:04, xenophon\+freebsd wrote: -Original Message- From: owner-freebsd-sta...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- sta...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Kalchev Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2012 12:42 AM I really see no reason why your 'mail or calendaring server' should be able to wipe your devices.. This is the sort of bloat that keeps me away. From Microsoft products. I don't think that's fair to say. Email/calendaring seems to be the only connection point between a smartphone and an organization for at least the current crop of devices (although I'm sure that at some point soon, you'll be able to include organizational file servers as well). Again, what does your e-mail or calendaring service have to do with wiping your device clean?? Wiping the device is task for your device management platform, which does not belong to the e-mail or calendaring platform. If you connect your desktop to Exchange, is it supposed to be wiped too? What if the Exchange account is just one of the many e-mail accounts you use, as typically is the case? Even if you're just a SOHO or SMB, you should want to be able to locate or remotely wipe a device that's stolen, if only to ensure that someone doesn't have access to potentially sensitive personal information. Oh and by the way, not only do the Windows phones feature this, but so do the iPhones and the Android handsets - so this isn't just Microsoft. I understand you don't like it, but apparently Apple got this right. They have device management tool that is in no way ties to your e-mail or calendaring server. Not only Apple, but any sane vendor too. It is not excuse that because some (censored) at Microsoft has designed things this way, there are no other proper ways. In this regard I rather prefer the way Apple handles things. Shiny wrapper interface to pretty much generic technology. No reinvention of the wheel and experiments to see if it can be made square. You can't damn Microsoft for being too proprietary in one paragraph and then praise Apple for its openness in the next. Does not compute. I don't care how proprietary an proprietary thing is. If it is correctly implemented, it is ok, if it is not correctly implemented, it is not ok. Microsoft's wipe trough Exchange is weird, to put it mildly. Apple too had a track record of doing many proprietary things, but in recent years their offerings are, as I mentioned earlier, pretty much generic standard and widespread protocols with a lot of sugar coating. Daniel ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
Chris Rees utis...@gmail.com writes: On Jun 4, 2012 9:50 AM, Dave Hayes d...@jetcafe.org wrote: Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com writes: On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 07:24:11PM -0700, Dave Hayes wrote: I see features and pkgng and things being offered up as solutions... these are all well and good, but in my opinion more comprehensive documentation and support in these areas would do more good than pkgng. IMHO pkgng and optionsng are necessary, but not sufficient, to solve our current problems. Optionsng is nice, but lacking in documentation. Is it too much to ask port maintainers to write a bit more documentation on the options they are providing? Where are you looking? I updated the Porter's Handbook- is there something missing? Yes there is...my point. :) Perhaps I was unclear. Optionsng is likely a fine project. However, it does not include the idea of extra documentation on the user selectable options provided to a port. Often when building a port I am presented with a list of build options. For example, virtualbox has this: OPTIONS= QT4 Build with QT4 Frontend on \ DEBUG Build with debugging symbols off \ GUESTADDITIONS Build with Guest Additions off \ DBUS Build with D-Bus and HAL support on \ PULSEAUDIO Build with PulseAudio off \ X11 Build with X11 support on \ UDPTUNNEL Build with UDP tunnel support on \ VDE Build with VDE support off \ VNC Build with VNC support off \ WEBSERVICE Build Webservice off \ NLS Native language support on What I feel is missing from ports is the information that would allow me to make intelligent decisions about each option. To see what's missing, consider the following questions: - Why would I want pulseaudio in a hypervisor? - What, exactly, are guestadditions and why would I want them? - Why does this need dbus and hal? - What is VDE? - What webservice? etc. The porter's handbook is fine if you are writing ports. It's using them that can get opaque. There's meta topics also, these would be great to know about without having to read 200 mail messages: - Some people do not like pulseaudio for good technical reasons. What are those? What are the non-technical opinion based reasons? - What are the common objections to HAL and DBUS? It's this kind of attention to communication that I think FreeBSD, in any attempt to reach more users, needs to strongly consider. -- Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - d...@jetcafe.org The opinions expressed above are entirely my own Treat people as if they are what they ought to be, and you help them to become what they are capable of being. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 11:41:30 -0700 , Dave Hayes wrote: Yes there is...my point. :) Perhaps I was unclear. Optionsng is likely a fine project. However, it does not include the idea of extra documentation on the user selectable options provided to a port. Often when building a port I am presented with a list of build options. For example, virtualbox has this: OPTIONS= QT4 Build with QT4 Frontend on \ DEBUG Build with debugging symbols off \ GUESTADDITIONS Build with Guest Additions off \ DBUS Build with D-Bus and HAL support on \ PULSEAUDIO Build with PulseAudio off \ X11 Build with X11 support on \ UDPTUNNEL Build with UDP tunnel support on \ VDE Build with VDE support off \ VNC Build with VNC support off \ WEBSERVICE Build Webservice off \ NLS Native language support on What I feel is missing from ports is the information that would allow me to make intelligent decisions about each option. To see what's missing, consider the following questions: - Why would I want pulseaudio in a hypervisor? - What, exactly, are guestadditions and why would I want them? - Why does this need dbus and hal? - What is VDE? - What webservice? etc. The descriptions of the options assume the admin is familiar with the software they're installing. I do not think it is the FreeBSD Project's purview to document every option for every port. At the very least it'd take quite a lot of time and effort to document all of that. Beyond this, such explanations would duplicate each port's own documentation. If you're not familiar with something, you very probably shouldn't be installing it. Show me one other similar packaging system that does this level of handholding. The only comparable ones I can think of are portage and macports, and they certainly don't, either. -- Thanks and best regards, Chris Nehren pgpj0ijQG7gRP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
Chris Nehren apeiron+freebsd-sta...@isuckatdomains.net writes: The descriptions of the options assume the admin is familiar with the software they're installing. I do not think it is the FreeBSD Project's purview to document every option for every port. At the very least it'd take quite a lot of time and effort to document all of that. That's a fair position. Perhaps it would not be too much trouble to add this one idea to optionsng: a more info field on each option knob which may be filled in by a port maintainer. Beyond this, such explanations would duplicate each port's own documentation. Not necessarily. I don't have an example offhand, but I suspect there are a number of FreeBSD specific option knobs applied to ports. If you're not familiar with something, you very probably shouldn't be installing it. Basing my argument here on assumptions that FreeBSD wants more users, I would argue that the better policy is to be liberal in who you help and conservative in who you call unfamiliar. In this spirit, I can guarantee you that there are plenty of people who will install despite your requirement above, set some option that they shouldn't (or fail to set one that they should), and then come away with a bad experience. Instead, if the person familiar with the software (who is ostensibly writing the port) could spend just 5 more minutes writing a simple this option is documented at url://... or dont set this if you have port foo installed that would help a lot of people. Show me one other similar packaging system that does this level of handholding. The only comparable ones I can think of are portage and macports, and they certainly don't, either. The absence of such a system isn't really relevant to the idea of improving the current one is it? :) -- Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - d...@jetcafe.org The opinions expressed above are entirely my own Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music. -- Kristian Wilson, Nintendo, Inc, 1989 ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On 06/04/12 17:24, Chris Rees wrote: On 3 June 2012 21:55, O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: On 06/03/12 15:29, Erich wrote: Hi, On 03 June 2012 PM 5:14:10 Adam Strohl wrote: On 6/3/2012 11:14, Erich wrote: 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? I feel like I'm missing something. Why would you ever want to go back to an old version of the ports tree? You're ignoring tons of security issues! ... I think the PNG update isn't a security issue. And for not being a security issue, it triggered an inadequate mess! And if a port build is broken then the maintainer needs to fix it, that is the solution. Look at the comment of the maintainer of LibreOffice ... I must be missing something else here, it just seems like the underlying need for this is misguided (and dangerous from a security perspective). yes, you miss a very simple thing. Updated this morning your ports tree. Your client asks for something for Monday morning for which you need now a program which needs some kind of PNG but you did not install it. ... I spent now two complete days watching my boxes updating their ports. Several ports do not compile anymore (inkscape, libreoffice, libxul, to name some of the very hurting ones!). Do you have a machine that is fast enough to upgrade all your ports and still finish what your client needs Monday morning? Even my fastest box, a brand new 6 core Sandy-Bridge-E, wasn't capable of compiling all the ports in due time. Several ports requested attendance, several, as mentioned, didn't compile out of the blue. The ports tree is not broken as such. Only the installation gets broken in some sense. Have a version number there would allow people to go back to the last known working ports tree, install the software - or whatever has to be done - with a working system. Of course, the next step will be an upgrade. But only after the work which brings in the money is done. You do not face this problem on Windows. You can run a 10 year old 'kernel' and still install modern software. Erich I like having a very modern system with the most recent software. But in some cases, like these days with the PNG, FreeBSD's ports becomes again a problem. There is no convenient way to downgrade or allow the user/admin managing how to deal with the load of updates. You can't have both. As has been repeatedly explained to you, you should not expect an easy life with the very latest of software. Well, and repeatedly (no offense!) I will point out in this case, that I was FORCED having the latest software by the ports system! That it a difference in having running FreeBSD CURRENT on my own risk, or FreeBSD-STABLE due to new hardware and new drivers only supported by those and having a regular port update, which blows up the system because of the newest software! I take the burden of having not an easy life, but this, what is expected from so many users of FreeBSD, is simply beyond ... Either stick to releases, or put up with lots of compiling etc-- you should not complain because of self-inflicted problems. As I repeatedly have to point out in this case - the issue is not with STABLE and CURRENT, it is also with RELEASE. And as it has been pointed out herein so many times: FreeBSD ports lack in a version tagging. How would you suggest avoiding the problems we face with the ports by being sticky on RELEASE, if the problem is spread over all branches? Please remember that we do compile packages for release, or if more up to date packages are required you can use the stable package sets which are rarely over five days or so. If it is about the binary packages - then you're right. Stick with RELEASE and binary packages - if available (the mentioned office packages are often much delayed). In such a case one is better with a binary spread version of an OS and this would exactly hit the subject of the thread: Why NOT using ... blablabla Chris At the end, I'd like to see more care about the way ports get updated. There is no way to avoid messes like described at this very moment. And it is a kind of unedifying . oh signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Hi, On 04 June 2012 17:24:31 Baptiste Daroussin wrote: On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 10:55:37PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: On 06/03/12 15:29, Erich wrote: And if a port build is broken then the maintainer needs to fix it, that is the solution. Look at the comment of the maintainer of LibreOffice ... LibreOffice is not a small port, I managed to make 3.5.x work until the The work on it is not that complicated but it requires a huge amount of time which I currently don't have, and upstream is really nice to help porting. I hope that this is all just a misunderstanding. I read the tread as such that LibreOffice is just an example of what can go wrong. Of course, it is your time and your work and nobody has the right to criticise you for your efforts. I hope that it is ok for you to use 'your' port as an example here for what can go wrong. Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
On 04 June 2012 16:24:56 Chris Rees wrote: On 3 June 2012 21:55, O. Hartmann ohart...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote: On 06/03/12 15:29, Erich wrote: Hi, On 03 June 2012 PM 5:14:10 Adam Strohl wrote: On 6/3/2012 11:14, Erich wrote: 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? I feel like I'm missing something. Why would you ever want to go back to an old version of the ports tree? You're ignoring tons of security issues! ... I think the PNG update isn't a security issue. And for not being a security issue, it triggered an inadequate mess! And if a port build is broken then the maintainer needs to fix it, that is the solution. Look at the comment of the maintainer of LibreOffice ... I must be missing something else here, it just seems like the underlying need for this is misguided (and dangerous from a security perspective). yes, you miss a very simple thing. Updated this morning your ports tree. Your client asks for something for Monday morning for which you need now a program which needs some kind of PNG but you did not install it. ... I spent now two complete days watching my boxes updating their ports. Several ports do not compile anymore (inkscape, libreoffice, libxul, to name some of the very hurting ones!). Do you have a machine that is fast enough to upgrade all your ports and still finish what your client needs Monday morning? Even my fastest box, a brand new 6 core Sandy-Bridge-E, wasn't capable of compiling all the ports in due time. Several ports requested attendance, several, as mentioned, didn't compile out of the blue. The ports tree is not broken as such. Only the installation gets broken in some sense. Have a version number there would allow people to go back to the last known working ports tree, install the software - or whatever has to be done - with a working system. Of course, the next step will be an upgrade. But only after the work which brings in the money is done. You do not face this problem on Windows. You can run a 10 year old 'kernel' and still install modern software. Erich I like having a very modern system with the most recent software. But in some cases, like these days with the PNG, FreeBSD's ports becomes again a problem. There is no convenient way to downgrade or allow the user/admin managing how to deal with the load of updates. You can't have both. As has been repeatedly explained to you, you should not expect an easy life with the very latest of software. but FreeBSD only offer bleeding edge. This is why I suggest to have version numbers on the ports tree. Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
In message 4fcd23fe.20...@zedat.fu-berlin.de, O. Hartmann writes: Well, and repeatedly (no offense!) I will point out in this case, that I was FORCED having the latest software by the ports system! That it a difference in having running FreeBSD CURRENT on my own risk, or FreeBSD-STABLE due to new hardware and new drivers only supported by those and having a regular port update, which blows up the system because of the newest software! You were not forced to use the latest. You can quite easily use years old ports trees if you want to. I just installed a port using a tree from October 2011. I could have upgraded the ports tree to the latest and greatest but I choose not to. I take the burden of having not an easy life, but this, what is expected from so many users of FreeBSD, is simply beyond ... There are also binary packages available. Either stick to releases, or put up with lots of compiling etc-- you should not complain because of self-inflicted problems. As I repeatedly have to point out in this case - the issue is not with STABLE and CURRENT, it is also with RELEASE. And as it has been pointed out herein so many times: FreeBSD ports lack in a version tagging. Version tagging is just a convient way to get a snapshot at a particular point in time unless you create branches that are them made stable by doing a release engineering process on the branch. This would require rules like don't make a change unless it is to fix something that is broken. It would also require a lot of man power. If you are willing to pay salaries for people to do this then I'm sure there are people who would do the job. The ports system has to ability to set the ports tree to any point in time in its existance. You can then build all the indexes as they were at that point in time. How would you suggest avoiding the problems we face with the ports by being sticky on RELEASE, if the problem is spread over all branches? Please remember that we do compile packages for release, or if more up to date packages are required you can use the stable package sets which are rarely over five days or so. If it is about the binary packages - then you're right. Stick with RELEASE and binary packages - if available (the mentioned office packages are often much delayed). In such a case one is better with a binary spread version of an OS and this would exactly hit the subject of the thread: Why NOT using ... blablabla Chris At the end, I'd like to see more care about the way ports get updated. There is no way to avoid messes like described at this very moment. And it is a kind of unedifying . And I'd like to be able to world hunger and to see FTL travel. One doesn't have to live at the bleeding edge with ports if one doesn't want to even when compiling. One can live a day, a week, a month behind the bleeding edge and allow other to hit problems and report them. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Hi, On 05 June 2012 11:24:25 Mark Andrews wrote: Version tagging is just a convient way to get a snapshot at a particular point in time unless you create branches that are them we do not ask for more. There should be only one difference to a snapshot. As snapshot has a date. No matter in what state the ports tree was, it is in that state in the ports tree. If user - especially the one not so fit in this aspect - want to use a snapshot, it will be difficult to impossible to figure out which one they need. If version numbers would be introduced, it would be ok to use the version number of the FreeBSD and have only version available which reflect the release version of the ports tree. People here want to make always a perfect system. People like me want to have some small things in there available with a click. As the ports trees are there anyway, only the direct link to the snapshot of that day or a version number in the ports tree would be needed to make this available for people who just want to use FreeBSD. Please note, I do not want any extra work spend here to make this perfect. I only want a simple way to fall back to a big net which is not that old from which the user can restart. You can add a huge note to the links stating the risks. This is all fine. There is another reason why I ask for this. I noticed a long time ago that the ports are in a better shape around the release date of a new version. So, I try to get it always around the release dates. But, some times - you know how life is - I miss this date. It does not kill me but it leads some times to extra work steps I can do but I see the problems people will face who know FreeBSD not that well. One doesn't have to live at the bleeding edge with ports if one doesn't want to even when compiling. One can live a day, a week, a month behind the bleeding edge and allow other to hit problems and report them. How is this done with the knowledge of a beginner? Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
In message 3506767.fvm2kmt...@x220.ovitrap.com, Erich writes: Hi, On 05 June 2012 11:24:25 Mark Andrews wrote: Version tagging is just a convient way to get a snapshot at a particular point in time unless you create branches that are them we do not ask for more. There should be only one difference to a snapshot. As snapshot has a date. No matter in what state the ports tree was, it is in th at state in the ports tree. If user - especially the one not so fit in this a spect - want to use a snapshot, it will be difficult to impossible to figure out which one they need. If version numbers would be introduced, it would be ok to use the version num ber of the FreeBSD and have only version available which reflect the release version of the ports tree. It's already there. If you want the ports as of FreeBSD 4.x EOL then the tag is RELEASE_4_EOL. If you want ports as of FreeBSD 9.0 then the tag is RELEASE_9_9_0. People here want to make always a perfect system. People like me want to have some small things in there available with a click. As the ports trees are there anyway, only the direct link to the snapshot of that day or a version number in the ports tree would be needed to make this a vailable for people who just want to use FreeBSD. Please note, I do not want any extra work spend here to make this perfect. I only want a simple way to fall back to a big net which is not that old from w hich the user can restart. You can add a huge note to the links stating the risks. This is all fine. There is another reason why I ask for this. I noticed a long time ago that th e ports are in a better shape around the release date of a new version. So, I try to get it always around the release dates. But, some times - you know ho w life is - I miss this date. It does not kill me but it leads some times to extra work steps I can do but I see the problems people will face who know Fr eeBSD not that well. One doesn't have to live at the bleeding edge with ports if one doesn't want to even when compiling. One can live a day, a week, a month behind the bleeding edge and allow other to hit problems and report them. How is this done with the knowledge of a beginner? One reads the documentation. Erich -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
One doesn't have to live at the bleeding edge with ports if one doesn't want to even when compiling. One can live a day, a week, a month behind the bleeding edge and allow other to hit problems and report them. To be pedantic, there's a lot of difference between reporting problems, and supplying fixes. Sometimes figuring out the fixes is beyond the capabilities of our maintainers, of course. People should feel free to ask for help on the mailing lists or forums in those cases. But our general problem won't be solved merely by tagging. There have to be people willing to test based only on whatever tree, or branch, or whatever, has been tagged. This is on reason why the tree at release time is _somewhat_ more stable: we are asking people to test, test, test. (The fact that we slow down the rate of major changes to the tree accounts for the rest.) mcl ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?
On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 18:49:45 +0300 Daniel Kalchev dan...@digsys.bg wrote: On 04.06.12 18:04, xenophon\+freebsd wrote: -Original Message- From: owner-freebsd-sta...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- sta...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Kalchev Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2012 12:42 AM I really see no reason why your 'mail or calendaring server' should be able to wipe your devices.. This is the sort of bloat that keeps me away. From Microsoft products. I don't think that's fair to say. Email/calendaring seems to be the only connection point between a smartphone and an organization for at least the current crop of devices (although I'm sure that at some point soon, you'll be able to include organizational file servers as well). Again, what does your e-mail or calendaring service have to do with wiping your device clean?? Wiping the device is task for your device management platform, which does not belong to the e-mail or calendaring platform. If you connect your desktop to Exchange, is it supposed to be wiped too? What if the Exchange account is just one of the many e-mail accounts you use, as typically is the case? It is part of the protocol, Exchanged ActiveSync, used by Exchange based mobile devices. In this regard I rather prefer the way Apple handles things. Shiny wrapper interface to pretty much generic technology. No reinvention of the wheel and experiments to see if it can be made square. You can't damn Microsoft for being too proprietary in one paragraph and then praise Apple for its openness in the next. Does not compute. I don't care how proprietary an proprietary thing is. If it is correctly implemented, it is ok, if it is not correctly implemented, it is not ok. Microsoft's wipe trough Exchange is weird, to put it mildly. Apple too had a track record of doing many proprietary things, but in recent years their offerings are, as I mentioned earlier, pretty much generic standard and widespread protocols with a lot of sugar coating. From a enterprise perspective, it makes sense. Lets say a device goes missing, it allows one to wipe it the next time it calls home. The usefulness of such a feature is better disconnected from the debate of proprietary v. non-proprietary though, given the different nature of both issues. ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
Hi, On 05 June 2012 12:48:20 Mark Andrews wrote: In message 3506767.fvm2kmt...@x220.ovitrap.com, Erich writes: On 05 June 2012 11:24:25 Mark Andrews wrote: It's already there. If you want the ports as of FreeBSD 4.x EOL then the tag is RELEASE_4_EOL. If you want ports as of FreeBSD 9.0 then the tag is RELEASE_9_9_0. I did not know this. Do you have a link for this? I never read about it. Erich ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD?
In message 2490439.ec638ti...@x220.ovitrap.com, Erich writes: Hi, On 05 June 2012 12:48:20 Mark Andrews wrote: In message 3506767.fvm2kmt...@x220.ovitrap.com, Erich writes: On 05 June 2012 11:24:25 Mark Andrews wrote: It's already there. If you want the ports as of FreeBSD 4.x EOL then the tag is RELEASE_4_EOL. If you want ports as of FreeBSD 9.0 then the tag is RELEASE_9_9_0. I did not know this. Do you have a link for this? I never read about it. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/cvs-tags.html If you wander around in http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ you can see all the possible tags. Erich -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
