freebsd stable - Sep 2014 - [HEADSUP] pkg(8) is now the only package management tool

Andrew Berg wrote:
> On 2014.09.01 21:27, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
>   
>> Actually it's an inconvenience for someone like me and you.  Not
for
>> many freebsd users, and certainly not for me 6 months ago if I
hadn't
>> been writing my own ports.... oh and what was it, 1.3.6 -> 1.3.7?
broke
>> shit... (badly) ...
>>     
> There were instructions for upgrading 1.3.6 to 1.3.7 alongside a notice
that
> things would not be good if the instructions were not followed and an
> explanation of the issue. I think these kinds of notices need to reach more
> people, but of course, that is easier said than done.
> BTW, from what I have observed, 1.3.x issues have affected Poudriere users
the
> most, binary package users a bit less (but still significantly), and pure
ports
> users very little.
>   
I am a poudriere user... across 8.4, 9.0, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 10.0 on both
i386 and amd64 :/
>   
>>> Also, 9.3 is out and the 9.2 EOL is not far away. Not sure why you
would be
>>> doing a new install with 9.2.
>>>   
>>>       
>> Try getting yourself a FreeBSD server at Softlayer...  They still
>> install 7.x for Christ's sake (amongst others - but last time I
checked,
>> on new servers, 8.4, 9.0, 9.1, 10.0*)
>>     
> Fair enough.
>
>   
>> (not had time - because an EOL message is not a 'It will not
>> work after this date' message it is a 'you're unsupported
after this
>> date and things *might* not work as expected'
>>     
> No, it means "we're not supporting this any more, so we don't
care if there are
> new vulnerabilities or things stop working". I'm not going to
dictate to other
> people what their upgrade schedule should be, but anyone running
unsupported
> versions of software should not have any expectation that the ecosystem
around
> it will be accommodating.
>   
That's my point - there was a patch waiting to submit that knowingly
broke pkg_install at midnight on the day after the EOL... the EOL
shouldn't be an EOL - because it was really a 'portsnap after this date
before you upgrade and you're screwed it won't work any more at
all...'
> The ports tree already requires a lot work to make sure everything works on
> supported versions of FreeBSD, and I see no reason whatsoever for anyone to
put
> effort into making it work on EOL versions.
>   
Some of us have production systems that span 6.0->10.0 (and most version
in between) and are fighting fires with minimal help just trying to keep
ahead....

-- 
Michelle Sullivan
http://www.mhix.org/

On 2014.09.01 22:09, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
> That's my point - there was a patch waiting to submit that knowingly
> broke pkg_install at midnight on the day after the EOL... the EOL
> shouldn't be an EOL - because it was really a 'portsnap after this
date
> before you upgrade and you're screwed it won't work any more at
all...'
As Peter outlined, this EOL was announced long ago, and it was mentioned at
least once that it was to allow breaking changes. There really would be no
reason to drop support for it in the ports tree if there were no plans to make
changes.