FreeBSD did it again (still)

Heikki Lindholm holindho at
Thu Jul 6 13:00:06 UTC 2017

On 06.07.2017 14:22, Baho Utot wrote:
> On 07/06/17 02:07, Heikki Lindholm wrote:
>> 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).
> Should you not be confindent in that the base system builds followed by 
> Xorg and a desktop manager?

Of course, but it's easy to see why that's not happening with a 
constantly evolving system. If you look at any of the bug reports on 
ports, you'll probably notice that most stuff gets tested by the 
reporter and maybe one or two devs who fix the bug - that leaves 
probably around 10000 other configurations untested.

Sometimes I really don't feel like spending my time on fighting things 
like these. For instance, it took me months just to figure out all the 
boot loader stuff needed to install on an old macpro and asking for help 
yielded basically nothing. After that, fixing many ports to have a 
working Xorg didn't exactly lessen my aggravation. However, it's also a 
matter of choosing the right tools. If something is just too much work, 
maybe there's another one that isn't (Windows, Mac, whatever).

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list