Re: Stable tag will be slipped Sunday and release engineering will begin Monday

[Michel Talon <talon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

0050405140241.GF1443@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-Agent: KNode/0.7.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Lines: 31
NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.227.32.26
X-Trace: 1112738495 crater_reader.dragonflybsd.org 717 82.227.32.26
Xref: crater_reader.dragonflybsd.org dragonfly.users:2747

Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 03:56:13PM +0200, Michel Talon wrote:
>> By the way, the horrendous behaviour of the ports system
>> which completely remove old libraries without ever asking is
>> a big part of the problem. At least portupgrade saves
>> copies in the compat directory.
> 
> THAT'S NOT A BUG. Sorry, but just believing that saving the old
> libs is enough is very naive. Too much already depends e.g. on
> DSOs. Not installing libraries just leaves junk for those which
> don't break dependencies. portupgrade is part of the problem.
> 
> Joerg

I completely disagree with you. I couldn't care less that junk
stays on my hard disk. With present day hundred gigabit disks 
leaving ten versions of a library is no problem at all. On the
contrary, removing supposedly orphaned libraries is the main cause of
trouble during upgrades, and such trouble causes immensely more pain
than the loss of a few megabytes. That such a procedure is not
necessarily foolproof, because you may miss plugins hidden somewhere
doesn't change the fact that > 90% of problems come from omitting
to keep copies of old libs. Of course in an ideal world, one could
manage ports upgrades on another machine or a jail as you explain,
but for most people this is a completely theoretical and utopic
solution.


-- 
Michel Talon