FreeBSD did it again (still)

Heikki Lindholm holindho at
Thu Jul 6 06:15:12 UTC 2017

On 06.07.2017 00:39, Baho Utot wrote:
> On 7/5/2017 5:30 PM, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
>> On 2017-07-06 03:21, Baho Utot wrote:
>>> On 7/5/2017 4:31 PM, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
>>>> On 2017-07-06 01:54, Baho Utot wrote:
>>>>> Up graded an old laptop from 10.1 to 11.0-p10.  I then checked out 
>>>>> the latest quarterly ports.  I figured that FreeBSD would barf and 
>>>>> I was not disappointed. Built the ports with synth and then I 
>>>>> installed them, xorg promptly shit itself.
>>>>> So I typed pkg autoremove just for shits and giggles. Before the 
>>>>> upgrade pkg autoremove did nothing ( nothing to remove ) the latest 
>>>>> pkg wanted to remove all of Xorg and some other things but not 
>>>>> remove lumina.  Figure that one out.
>>>>> Working on figuring this out.
>>>>> Can you tell me why FreeBSD doesn't need versioned ports again? I 
>>>>> am just looking for something that works, I don't need the last 
>>>>> version of xyz that just came off the press.
>>>>> Thinking I may need to leave FreeBSD and find something that is 
>>>>> stable/works.  An upgrade from a recent version should not requir 
>>>>> days to weeks to get it to work.
>>>> Hi,
>>>> Not sure what you are aiming at here but - just felt I had to comment.
>>>> You are probably right that there must be cohersion between packages 
>>>> and system when using prebuilt binaries.
>>>> My way of doing it is the opposite, everything is compiled from 
>>>> source, the classic *nix way. This way, FreeBSD has never let me down.
>>>> I think the best approach if you have an older system where it takes 
>>>> ages to compile, you really need to follow a strict path using 
>>>> packages. On a more recent system, nothing beats source builds.
>>>> There has been a lot of discussion over this matter recently, please 
>>>> understand that this is not RedHat or Ubuntu, the resources needed 
>>>> to keep up with building binaries are limited in comparison. If you 
>>>> need prebuilt packages, please just contribute to the work.
>>>> Just my SEK 0.2
>>>> //per
>>> I built the ports from svn source using synth I did not use prebuilt 
>>> binaries.  I did do it the classic *nix way.
>> That was odd. But if you provide more detailed info I'm sure there is 
>> help on the list.
>> I only use portmaster due to its ease of use, have no experience from 
>> synth.
>> //per
> What is ODD is that I have not received my original post that started 
> this thread, from the mailing list.  It has not come thru the FreeBSD 
> mailing list.   I wanted to have a look at the headers. I checked the 
> timestamps on my client box was/is correct ( running ntp ) my mail 
> server is correct ( running ntp ).
> I am investigating why  the upgrade to the laptop has failed.   This 
> happens every time I upgrade if the upgrade cycle is 6 months to a 
> year.  I simply don't have the time to go thru this every time I do an 
> upgrade.  It should just work ( I know some edge case may not that is 
> not what I am talking about ).  One should be able to update a machine ( 
> desktop ) and it should still function.  If I am crashing a package or 
> two that is fine, the whole desktop should not go from usable to 
> crashing/puking/barfing.

I think problems are to expected from a rolling style of distro. I've 
been using FreeBSD as my main desktop for half a year now and every 
ports upgrade has required some tweaking. I've submitted patches and 
they have usually been applied quickly and stuff has got fixed. On the 
flip side you get the ability to configure the ports (which I've found 
so great in FreeBSD ports that it's hard to go back to anything else) 
and not having to do major re-installs of the whole system every half a 
year to stay current (ubuntu).

Compared to, say, gentoo, FreeBSD ports has still been much less 
trouble. On gentoo, in addition to generic ports breakage, you're also 
fighting the ports/package manager that constantly wants you to accept 
packages, one by one, from testing/unstable side or add accepted 
architectures to packages, just make stuff buidld/install at all.

One thing I'd like to see in a ports system (if not already there) is 
some kind of install journal and tools using it that would allow, for 
instance, to do a whole reinstall from scratch as in "do what I did to 
build this system, but use the new versions" and it would install ports 
with the same options in exactly the same order (if allowed by new 
dependencies), or allow removing cruft introduced by some package that 
I've deleted that no other packages are using (pkg autoremove is too broad).

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list