ports tree tagging again

Dmitry Marakasov amdmi3 at mail.ru
Fri Aug 18 10:55:56 UTC 2006

* Roman Bogorodskiy (novel at freebsd.org) wrote:
> 2. Port tree is unstable
> IMO, port tree is not very stable. I mean: we're all human and more or
> less often make mistakes and inaccurate commits. So you cannot be sure
> that if you cvsup/portsnap your tree, it will not break something
> (e.g. because of some typo). It's OK to have such errors in general, and
> we can do nothing with it, but there are a lot of silly errors which
> could be avoided and you definitely don't deal with on a stable system.
I won't call it unstable. I myself have 3 FreeBSD boxes with about 600
ports installed on each. Two boxes are updated regularily, anoher one
have some ports outdated - for all those I can't remember any problems
for 2-3 years. If there actually are any breakages, I don't think
they cost the effort of maintaining branched ports tree.

Best regards,
 Dmitry                          mailto:amdmi3 at mail.ru

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list