Subject: Re: pkgsrc-stable branch stories?
To: None <pkgsrc-users@NetBSD.org>
From: Rhialto <email@example.com>
Date: 04/18/2006 00:59:34
On Mon 17 Apr 2006 at 11:18:14 -0400, Johnny Lam wrote:
> I personally use the stable branch on production servers. I find it
> avoids the chaos of keeping up with rapidly changing PKGREVISIONs that
> happen on pkgsrc HEAD at times. I keep a sandbox handy for rebuilding
> packages when there is a security update on the stable branch, and I
> update all of my software to the newest stable branch every quarter.
Same here. I use pkg_chk in the sandbox - I noticed that sometimes it
doesn't update all that I expect, or it removes a package for updating
but later re-installs the slightly older binary pkg. That gives some
If something breaks that didn't break before, I yell about it here or in
a pr, hopefully with a fix or workaround that I found. Apparently, on
Alpha (previously) or amd64 (now) there is more breakage than on i386,
since in a perfect world all packages would compile. It is sometimes
frustrating when my patches are not applied right away, in the light
that the stable branch at least should always compile (I refer here at
least to my patches for vlc and audacity I posted in this mailing list;
there is also the crash of sh, in the configure script of uae, and I
personally think that crashing /bin/sh is pretty darn serious (I haven't
had the chance to see if that still happens in -current) and should at
least be fixed in 3.1)
> -- Johnny Lam <firstname.lastname@example.org>
___ Olaf 'Rhialto' Seibert -- You author it, and I'll reader it.
\X/ rhialto/at/xs4all.nl -- Cetero censeo "authored" delendum esse.