On 31.05.2016 15:59, Vincent Hoffman-Kazlauskas wrote:
What you cannot do is create old-style packages from a new ports
tree. This is because the ports infrastructure has been changing
since pkg_install was deprecated, and pkg_install simply will not
work with the current ports tree (and, as I understand it, cannot
practically be modified in order to work with it).
You are mostly correct. It is possible to modify and old ports-tree to
get the new software in. I have at least two customer paying me for
exact this work. But to be fair: it is no fun and harder with every
new release :D
I suppose what some customer need is an LTS version. Missing one is a
show stopper for FreeBSD usage in many firms i talked to. I do not
think this is a good idea from a technical point - but firms are slow
and want stability.
LTS of the base system or ports? The base system is already quite well
supported long-term.
This is a very good question, because it is not that clear. But let me
state right here: No, the base system has not a good long-term support!
Yes, we have 2 years for the latest release, but 2 years seems to be
very short for firms. Often they want 5 years.
And you are forced to update. You can't stay on say 10.1 or 10.2 because
the support will end 2016. Which is short, because 10.2 was released in
august 2015. This is only one and a half year.
To be fair the support is last release + 2 years, supporting a minor
version for more than 2 years seems unreasonable, compare to say redhat
a major commercial vendor.
If you want to be fair: this is not true. This would be true, if 10.1,
10.2 or 10.3 for example were minor-updates. But they were not. The
"minor updates" needs installing thousands of patches, updating all your
jails and sometimes all your ports too. It sometimes throw you out of
your server, because an SSH-Update changed the config and no key will
work anymore. In the last years i encounter a number of such unpleasant
issues in such "minor updates".
And if i calculate the time for such an "minor update" and hold it
against the time needed for a "major update" there is nearly no
difference. Same for occurred problems, needed changes, etc. There is
just no difference between an update from for example 9.2 to 9.3 or 9.3
to 10.0. At least its the same. And therefore: no, there is no real long
term supported. It is just stated, but in practice its like there is none.
Maybe i just see this wrong. But than i need to adjust my arguments for
a discussion. What to say when discussing if the OS should be FreeBSD or
Ubuntu for example and somebody referrers to the 5 year LTS support of
Ubuntu?
Greetings,
Torsten
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
