4.9-STABLE --> 4.8-RELEASE downgrade. Pitfalls?

Parv parv at pair.com
Wed Jun 9 01:18:33 GMT 2004


wrote Chuck Swiger thusly...
>
> Parv wrote:
> [ ... ]
> >Port making will fail if you keep ports trees updated at least due
> >to use of new make(1) syntax introduced, in 4.9, in a port's
> >Makefile.  The problem i noticed was related to use of parenthesis
> >in ".if ... .endif" structure.
>
> Thanks for the response, Parv, but ugh!  I cringe at the notion that
> continually tweaking make and the port Makefiles causes problems
> with backwards compatibility to a still-supported FreeBSD release.

That looks like the message that i sent to one of the FreeBSD lists.
After searching PR database, it seems somebody else found the exact
reason...

  http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/60288


I think life w/ NetBSD would not be so bad via its FreeBSD ports
equivalent "pkgsrc".  One other known benefit, via pkgviews, is that
multiple versions of a particular an be simultaneously installed/used
at the cost of use of many symbolic links.

Here are some things on pkgsrc ...

  http://www.NetBSD.org/~jlam/pkgsrcCon/presentations.html
  http://www.NetBSD.org/Documentation/pkgsrc/
  http://www.NetBSD.org/Documentation/software/packages.html
  http://www.NetBSD.org/Documentation/software/pkgviews.pdf


The last time i read papers/slides listed on "pkgsrcCon", ugly
symbolic links would have been the only problem for me after the
problem of potentially missing ported software that i currently use on
FreeBSD. (No, i have not checked the pkgsrc list).

Mind you that i have no experience of NetBSD or pkgsrc, so both may
have their own problems currently unknown to me.


  - Parv

-- 



More information about the freebsd-stable mailing list