On 9/21/2014 6:53 PM, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
> Michelle Sullivan wrote:
>> Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> The ports tree has been modified to only support pkg(8) as package
>>> management
>>> system for all supported version of FreeBSD.
>>>
>>> if you were still using pkg_in
Michelle Sullivan wrote:
> Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> The ports tree has been modified to only support pkg(8) as package management
>> system for all supported version of FreeBSD.
>>
>> if you were still using pkg_install (pkg_* tools) you will have to upgrade
>> your
>> syste
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 05:17:48PM +0200, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
> Mathieu Arnold wrote:
> > +--On 3 septembre 2014 16:36:29 +0200 Michelle Sullivan
> > wrote:
> > | Mathieu Arnold wrote:
> > |> I still don't see what you have to say about what EOL mean, it's *End Of
> > |> Life* meaning after,
Mathieu Arnold wrote:
> +--On 3 septembre 2014 16:36:29 +0200 Michelle Sullivan
> wrote:
> | Mathieu Arnold wrote:
> |> I still don't see what you have to say about what EOL mean, it's *End Of
> |> Life* meaning after, it is dead, and won't exist any more.
> |>
> |>
> | Ahh so all those Window
Mathieu Arnold wrote:
> I still don't see what you have to say about what EOL mean, it's *End Of
> Life* meaning after, it is dead, and won't exist any more.
>
>
Ahh so all those Windows XP servers are dead and don't work anymore...
--
Michelle Sullivan
http://www.mhix.org/
__
+--On 3 septembre 2014 17:17:48 +0200 Michelle Sullivan
wrote:
| Mathieu Arnold wrote:
|> +--On 3 septembre 2014 16:36:29 +0200 Michelle Sullivan
|> wrote:
|> | Mathieu Arnold wrote:
|> |> I still don't see what you have to say about what EOL mean, it's *End
|> |> Of Life* meaning after, it is de
+--On 3 septembre 2014 16:36:29 +0200 Michelle Sullivan
wrote:
| Mathieu Arnold wrote:
|> I still don't see what you have to say about what EOL mean, it's *End Of
|> Life* meaning after, it is dead, and won't exist any more.
|>
|>
| Ahh so all those Windows XP servers are dead and don't work a
+--On 2 septembre 2014 13:47:32 +0200 Michelle Sullivan
wrote:
| Marcus von Appen wrote:
|> Alban Hertroys :
|>
|>>
|>> I can totally understand that at some point it starts to get
|>> impossible to maintain two separate packaging systems and I understand
|>> that you think 2 years is enough tim
Brandon Allbery wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Michelle Sullivan
> wrote:
>
>
>> This is my only option - however, I suspect I'm already f**ked - my
>> build servers kicked off at 4am and the non pkg jails automatically
>> converted themselves to pkg.. the pkg jails obviously continu
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Michelle Sullivan
wrote:
> This is my only option - however, I suspect I'm already f**ked - my
> build servers kicked off at 4am and the non pkg jails automatically
> converted themselves to pkg.. the pkg jails obviously continued...
> however I now have a repo th
Garrett Cooper wrote:
>> On Sep 2, 2014, at 4:47, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
>>
>> Marcus von Appen wrote:
>>
>>> Alban Hertroys :
>>>
>>>
I can totally understand that at some point it starts to get
impossible to maintain two separate packaging systems and I understand
th
> On Sep 2, 2014, at 4:47, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
>
> Marcus von Appen wrote:
>> Alban Hertroys :
>>
>>>
>>> I can totally understand that at some point it starts to get
>>> impossible to maintain two separate packaging systems and I understand
>>> that you think 2 years is enough time to sh
Brandon Allbery :
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 6:52 AM, Marcus von Appen wrote:
It also should be noted that everyone had enough time to raise those issues
in the time between tthe announcement and now
If this is an issue that needed to be brought up, then FreeBSD has
apparently never before bee
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 6:52 AM, Marcus von Appen wrote:
> It also should be noted that everyone had enough time to raise those issues
> in the time between tthe announcement and now
>
If this is an issue that needed to be brought up, then FreeBSD has
apparently never before been used in an enter
On 9/1/2014 9:27 PM, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
> oh and what was it, 1.3.6 -> 1.3.7? broke
> shit... (badly) ...
What broke? I am not aware of any new regressions in 1.3.7.
--
Regards,
Bryan Drewery
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 2 Sep 2014, at 12:47, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
> I'm not happy that the EOL was
> not actually an EOL and it was actually a deadline.
I'm not sure what you think the difference is. The EOL says 'the FreeBSD
project no longer supports this configuration'. If you are not relying on us
for s
Marcus von Appen wrote:
> Alban Hertroys :
>
>>
>> I can totally understand that at some point it starts to get
>> impossible to maintain two separate packaging systems and I understand
>> that you think 2 years is enough time to shake things out, but
>> software vendors aren't that quick. For many
On 2 September 2014 11:08, Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 9/1/14, 8:03 PM, Andrew Berg wrote:
>>
>> On 2014.09.01 21:39, Julian Elischer wrote:
>>>
>>> sigh.. when are we as a project, all going to learn that reality in
>>> business is
>>> that you often need to install stuff that is old. Its not al
Alban Hertroys :
On 2 September 2014 11:08, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 9/1/14, 8:03 PM, Andrew Berg wrote:
On 2014.09.01 21:39, Julian Elischer wrote:
sigh.. when are we as a project, all going to learn that reality in
business is
that you often need to install stuff that is old. Its not a
On 2 September 2014 13:30, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
> Andrew Berg wrote:
> > On 2014.09.01 22:09, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
> >
> >> That's my point - there was a patch waiting to submit that knowingly
> >> broke pkg_install at midnight on the day after the EOL... the EOL
> >> shouldn't be an EOL
On 9/1/14, 8:03 PM, Andrew Berg wrote:
On 2014.09.01 21:39, Julian Elischer wrote:
sigh.. when are we as a project, all going to learn that reality in
business is
that you often need to install stuff that is old. Its not always your
choice.
The custommers require it..
You should try arguing wit
On 9/1/14, 7:59 PM, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
Julian Elischer wrote:
You should try arguing with someone like Bank of Americas security and
operations
department
You work for the same company as me?
in a past life, they were a customer.
some day about whether they want to suddenly upgrade 30
Andrew Berg wrote:
> On 2014.09.01 22:09, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
>
>> That's my point - there was a patch waiting to submit that knowingly
>> broke pkg_install at midnight on the day after the EOL... the EOL
>> shouldn't be an EOL - because it was really a 'portsnap after this date
>> before y
Andrew Berg wrote:
> On 2014.09.01 21:27, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
>
>> Actually it's an inconvenience for someone like me and you. Not for
>> many freebsd users, and certainly not for me 6 months ago if I hadn't
>> been writing my own ports oh and what was it, 1.3.6 -> 1.3.7? broke
>> shit
Julian Elischer wrote:
>
> You should try arguing with someone like Bank of Americas security and
> operations
> department
You work for the same company as me?
> some day about whether they want to suddenly upgrade 300 machines
> for no real reason (from their perspective).
>
--
Michelle Sull
Sam Fourman Jr. wrote:
>> And for the portsnap users?
>>
>>
>>
> In short, this change doesn't directly effect portsnap users.
>
Sure about that?
> Portsnap is a tool that used to obtain a copy of the ports tree.
>
try this:
portsnap fetch update && cd /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/pkg && make
On 2014.09.01 22:09, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
> That's my point - there was a patch waiting to submit that knowingly
> broke pkg_install at midnight on the day after the EOL... the EOL
> shouldn't be an EOL - because it was really a 'portsnap after this date
> before you upgrade and you're screwed
Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The ports tree has been modified to only support pkg(8) as package management
> system for all supported version of FreeBSD.
>
> if you were still using pkg_install (pkg_* tools) you will have to upgrade
> your
> system.
>
> The simplest way is
> cd /usr/por
On Sep 1, 2014, at 20:02, Andrew Berg wrote:
> On 2014.09.01 21:27, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
>> Actually it's an inconvenience for someone like me and you. Not for
>> many freebsd users, and certainly not for me 6 months ago if I hadn't
>> been writing my own ports oh and what was it, 1.3.6
On 2014.09.01 21:39, Julian Elischer wrote:
> sigh.. when are we as a project, all going to learn that reality in
> business is
> that you often need to install stuff that is old. Its not always your
> choice.
> The custommers require it..
> You should try arguing with someone like Bank of Ameri
On 2014.09.01 21:27, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
> Actually it's an inconvenience for someone like me and you. Not for
> many freebsd users, and certainly not for me 6 months ago if I hadn't
> been writing my own ports oh and what was it, 1.3.6 -> 1.3.7? broke
> shit... (badly) ...
There were ins
On 9/1/14, 7:16 PM, Andrew Berg wrote:
On 2014.09.01 20:51, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
And for the portsnap users?
In short, this change doesn't directly effect portsnap users.
Sure about that?
I'm sure of it. Your issue is with the tree itself, not the tool used to fetch
it.
Corre
On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 03:51:31AM +0200 I heard the voice of
Michelle Sullivan, and lo! it spake thus:
>
> Correct, take a 9.2 install disk, install it, portsnap and then
> install pkg on it... Oh wait, you can't.. pkg_install is broken,
> and 9.2 install disks don't have pkg in the BaseOS
S
On 9/1/14, 6:39 PM, Sam Fourman Jr. wrote:
And for the portsnap users?
In short, this change doesn't directly effect portsnap users.
Portsnap is a tool that used to obtain a copy of the ports tree.
Portsnap is only one way, another way to get a copy of the ports tree is by
using subversion a
On 2014.09.01 20:51, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
>>> And for the portsnap users?
>>>
>> In short, this change doesn't directly effect portsnap users.
>>
> Sure about that?
I'm sure of it. Your issue is with the tree itself, not the tool used to fetch
it.
> Correct, take a 9.2 install disk, i
>
> And for the portsnap users?
>
>
In short, this change doesn't directly effect portsnap users.
Portsnap is a tool that used to obtain a copy of the ports tree.
Portsnap is only one way, another way to get a copy of the ports tree is by
using subversion and checking it out by using the svn comm
Hi all,
The ports tree has been modified to only support pkg(8) as package management
system for all supported version of FreeBSD.
if you were still using pkg_install (pkg_* tools) you will have to upgrade your
system.
The simplest way is
cd /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/pkg
make install
then run
pkg2n
37 matches
Mail list logo
