Subject: Re: [HEADS UP] Platform support
To: None <>
From: Lubomir Sedlacik <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 07/22/2007 03:58:24
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Jul 21, 2007 at 06:40:59PM +0000, Jonathan Perkin wrote:
> * On 2007-07-21 at 18:34 UTC, Jan Schaumann wrote:
> > The platform not being labeled as "supported" will not have any
> > effect on the packages continuing to build if they did and failing
> > to build if they didn't.
> >=20
> > I see the label "supported" as meaning "people are actually working
> > on these on a regular basis".  If your platform is not listed here,
> > then you still may have a fantastic experience using pkgsrc.
> Therefore, in light of this, I have to ask the question - what on
> earth is the point of this "supported" label, if at the end of the day
> it's ultimately a pointless and meaningless one at best, and confusing
> and misleading at worst (when a "supported" platform actually builds
> less packages than one which isn't)?
> Where's the benefit?  Where's the net gain for pkgsrc?


what purpose would this information serve?  what practical problem are
you trying to solve?  i certainly don't see the point.

another thing is that i can pretty much guarantee that the list will
bitrot within a year because nobody will keep it in sync with reality.
heck, even such a simple thing as the name of the currently supported
stable branch is often forgotten to be updated on the relevant web site!

i can point you to a lot of other things which need improving with the
maintenance of the stable branches and the binary packages archive on instead of making up arbitrary criteria to call pkgsrc
on a given platform this or that.

-- Lubomir Sedlacik <salo@{NetBSD,Xtrmntr,silcnet}.org>   --

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (NetBSD)