linux_base end of life?

Thomas Vogt turbo23 at
Tue Jan 27 13:00:56 PST 2004


Trevor Johnson wrote:
> There are a couple (RHSA-2003:325 and RHSA-2003:287) that haven't been
> fully brought into the ports collection.
Why? Was the fixed glibc not working anymore?

> It's possible for us to prepare our own RPMs.
Sure. But then "we" have to downgrade every patch to fit into the 
system. Could be a lot of work.

> Well, we have ports of Debian and Gentoo.  I haven't tried any of the
> numerous RPM-based ports with either of those; my guess would be that with
> Debian's "alien" facility, they could be made to co-exist with it, and
> that much of what we have in the ports collection is available in Gentoo's
> portage.  Other work they need is:
> - update Gentoo port so it's fetchable for all architectures
> - update Debian port
> - add Alpha support to Debian port
> - make a port of portage to accompany Gentoo port
> Do you have suggestions for other Linux distributions that could go in the
> ports collection?  Ones that support both Alpha and i386, are RPM-based,
> have some popularity and can be downloaded would be ideal IMO.
Hmm the only distribution that fits this description is Suse, IMHO. But 
perhaps Debian or Gentoo. Those distros don't suffer from potential 
corporate interests like RedHat or Suse, thus giving us more leeway.


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list