Install of pkg fuse-ntfs fails because of undefined symbol in pkg!?!
list1 at gjunka.com
Sat Feb 11 22:23:20 UTC 2017
On 11/02/2017 12:31, scratch65535 at att.net wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 17:46:15 +0100, Kurt Jaeger <lists at opsec.eu>
>>> On Thu, 9 Feb 2017 17:26:00 +0100, Kurt Jaeger wrote
>>>> Getting the ports/pkg tree moving with the velocity necessary
>>>> to cope with the fast-changing world, sometimes things break
>>>> and we all try to prevent this. Sometimes, mistakes happen...
>>> But it's the velocity that's the problem, Kurt.
>> While I very much sympathize with "The world rotates too fast,
>> I want to get off", for me it looks like as a project we do
>> not have alternatives.
> Why not? What would happen to fBSD that's not already happening?
> Why aren't people asking what's going on and how to turn it
> around? Could it be because they're too busy being busy?
> There's a well-known problem that kills ground-attack pilots all
> the time (or it used to; maybe they have safety features built
> into the aircraft now). They become fixated on their target, and
> they bring the nose of their aircraft further and further down to
> keep the target in their sights. Which causes them to fly right
> into the ground!
> Fixation is a problem in other fields, too.
>>> Do you know of anyone who has successfully defended, or even
>>> tried to defend, the current manic pace of revision and
>> Is it defense, if we see many projects (open source etc)
>> shorten their cycle time (e.g. php7), because they see the need to
>> add features or patch security issues (and breaks APIs/ABIs doing either) ?
> It seems more like an excuse than a defence, to me. Is it
> pushing Linux back? If not, what *would* push Linux back? Why
> is Linux so successful even though fBSD is older and better, and
> was once completely dominant in the space? What are the Linux
> projects doing that we're not?
I think the answer to this question is simple and is the same reason why
Windows and MacOS have been successful over time - user experience. To
be more exact - desktop user experience. People like me, developers, use
computers not only for work but also to do their daily stuff - watch
DVD, listen to music, catch up with people on Facebook, play games.
Sometimes I do need to switch to Windows but if I could just use FreeBSD
I would be done with that. I can do many of these things on FreeBSD now
but it has always been an uphill path. Everything is much easier on
Linux. Now we also have PCBSD/TrueOS but it shares the same pain as
FreeBSD - lack of drivers.
On Linux companies contribute drivers and dedicated applications and
it's a win-win situation. More drivers mean people can more easily
re-use their hardware that they bought for Windows, and more happy users
means companies are contributing more drivers.
Maybe the fate was set on Linux because FreeBSD was considered as a
server operating system rather than a Windows replacement, which Linux
was always trying to be? And good UI/desktop always provides a better
user experience than a command line and terminal.
And why would people want to switch between FreeBSD on the server and
Linux/Windows on their desktop if they can just go Linux/Windows all the
way through? I believe it's only by providing a good desktop experience
that FreeBSD can survive.
More information about the freebsd-ports