Portmaster failing

[Adam Weinberger]

On Jan 1, 2020, at 14:23, Franco Fichtner <franco at lastsummer.de> wrote:
> 
> Hi Adam,
> 
>> On 1. Jan 2020, at 10:18 PM, Adam Weinberger <adamw at adamw.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 1:51 PM @lbutlr <kremels at kreme.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 01 Jan 2020, at 13:46, Franco Fichtner <franco at lastsummer.de> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 1. Jan 2020, at 9:42 PM, @lbutlr <kremels at kreme.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 01 Jan 2020, at 13:40, Franco Fichtner <franco at lastsummer.de> wrote:
>>>>>> security/openssl was removed before, now security/openssl111 has become security/openssl.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ugh.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> A bit too eager for my taste, but that's why we all have private trees, don't we.  ;)
>>>>> 
>>>>> This is going to go poorly, if previous attempts to update to 1.1 are any indication.
>>>> 
>>>> With PHP 5.6 axed prematurely a while back I am interested to see OpenSSL 1.0.2
>>>> phased out now with a number of ports still not supporting 1.1.1 and seeing them
>>>> marked as broken sooner or later.
>>> 
>>> Well, at this point I cannot install openssl111 without deinstalling openssl, which I cannot deinstall since it is gone from ports.
>>> 
>>> Looks like I have to remove openssl, which … I mean, seriously, this seems pretty hostile.
>>> 
>>> Name           : openssl
>>> Version        : 1.0.2u,1
>>> Installed on   : Sun Dec 22 08:13:27 2019 MST
>>> 
>>> There was nothing at all on the 22nd about “WARNING THIS WILL BREAK EVERYTHING IN A WEEK” which to mean seems like it should have been made super obvious.
>> 
>> This is why we practically beg people to use poudriere.
> 
> Let me stop you right here and say: ports Framework itself is
> suffering from this wishful attitude and this has nothing to do
> with readily available poudriere "replacements" which are not
> as good as poudriere for sure.
> 
> If the ports framework isn't seen as a stand alone infrastructure
> worth its own integrity the discussion is already dead and the
> quality will keep to decline for every casual FreeBSD user who
> doesn't really care for this or that tool, but wants to install
> software from the ports tree manually.
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> Franco

I agree wholeheartedly with everything you said. The ports tree has grown too complex for a simple “make install” to be a predictable process. What we have now is a major usability problem wherein we have a large handful of tools, all but one of which are essentially broken. We do need a new approach to this problem. 

# Adam


—
Adam Weinberger
adamw at adamw.org
https://www.adamw.org