Overly aggressive obsoleting of ports (Re: FreeBSD ports which are currently scheduled for deletion)

Mikhail T. mi+thun at aldan.algebra.com
Fri Nov 21 15:05:23 UTC 2014

The two examples below strike me as particularly aggressive. Speaking as
someone working for a web-hosting group in a major company, I can tell
authoritatively, that -- had we used FreeBSD over there -- we would've
found having to upgrade this way unbearable.

We use Red Hat, which emphasizes stability -- to a fault, I might add.
But such whimsical dropping of software merely because it is
"deprecated" (not broken, mind you) is not helping me advocate for
FreeBSD. Not in the least...

If, for example, somebody was planning to add a new FreeBSD-server on
Dec 1st to their existing fleet, they are likely to reconsider it, if
their current software suit uses db48. The obsoletion-warnings should be
counted in /years/, not in months...

I, for one, have just upgraded my own system from 9.x to 10.1. The
freshly-rebuilt ports all use db48 -- perhaps, because that's what I had
installed already. An attempt to remove db48, would remove 34 other
ports along with it here:
Deinstallation has been requested for the following 35 packages (of 0
packages in the universe):

Installed packages to be REMOVED:
        jackit-0.124.1 (depends on db48-
        fluidsynth-1.1.6_1 (depends on db48-
        openal-soft-1.16.0_1 (depends on db48-
        ffmpeg-2.3.5_1,1 (depends on db48-
        alsa-plugins-1.0.28 (depends on db48-
        openjdk6-b25_1 (depends on db48-
        thunderbird-31.2.0 (depends on db48-
        polkit-kde-0.99.1_3 (depends on db48-
        kcm-polkit-kde-0.0.20121008_3 (depends on db48-
        kde-base-artwork-4.14.2 (depends on db48-

No doubt, this can be rectified by yet another rebuild of everything --
and there is, of course, a clever combination of portupgrade options to
help achieve that (if nothing breaks). But I am rather resentful of
having to do that /again/ so soon after the previous round. Had I not
been a FreeBSD user and contributor of over 20 years already, I would've
seriously considered a different offering over such nonsense.


On 21.11.2014 03:28, linimon at FreeBSD.org wrote:
> portname:           databases/db48
> description:        The Berkeley DB package, revision 4.8
> maintainer:         mandree at FreeBSD.org
> deprecated because: Please migrate to db5 or db6
> expiration date:    2014-11-30
> build errors:       none.
> overview:           http://portsmon.FreeBSD.org/portoverview.py?category=databases&portname=db48
> portname:           databases/memcachedb
> description:        Distributed storage system designed for persistence
> maintainer:         k at stereochro.me
> deprecated because: Depends on deprecated Berkeley DB version, needs
>                     porting to DB_SITE
> expiration date:    2014-11-30
> build errors:       none.
> overview:           http://portsmon.FreeBSD.org/portoverview.py?category=databases&portname=memcachedb

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list