[RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by OS version

Grzegorz Junka list1 at gjunka.com
Sat Jun 24 11:19:08 UTC 2017

>>> Fine. Considering that maintainers already apply patches to the latest
>>> quarterly branch. If there were to be OS version branches, it would
>>> mean that maintainers apart from what they are doing now would
>>> additionally need to apply selected patches to those OS version
>>> branches?
>> "OS version branches" would be a complete waste of time and resources, and it
>> would remove some level of separation/independence between the base and ports.
>> The crux of the problem here is so called "stable ports", not necessarily
>> tying them to the life cycle of a base release. It doesn't make sense to tie
>> version of a port to the base release. Especially with the new releng support
>> schedule that would mean 5 years per major version which is quite a lot.
> (snip)
> I personally can't see the rationale of many OS version branches of ports: far too much work.
> I had the thought of something like that for (NetBSD) pkgsrc: a very tall order, considering that pkgsrc has been ported to many OSes besides NetBSD.
> Imagine a separate branch of pkgsrc for every version and branch of NetBSD, FreeBSD, Linux, etc.
> I only follow the current branch of FreeBSD ports and pkgsrc, though now I have also become interested in pkgsrc-synth.
> Tom

Are there any advantages of using pkg instead of pkgsrc on FreeBSD?

Instead of having branches by OS version, would having ports LTS 
branches independent of the base system be a better solution?


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list