Stable tag will be slipped Sunday and release engineering will begin Monday
wbh at conducive.org
Tue Apr 5 16:11:36 PDT 2005
0050405140241.GF1443 at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <42530abe$0$717$415eb37d at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200504052232.j35MWID4086845 at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-Reply-To: <200504052232.j35MWID4086845 at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Message-ID: <42531b26$0$720$415eb37d at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
X-Trace: 1112742694 crater_reader.dragonflybsd.org 720 22.214.171.124
Xref: crater_reader.dragonflybsd.org dragonfly.users:2760
Matthew Dillon wrote:
> I think this is starting to rehash old issues. I've already said
> that my requirements for a packaging system are at a minimum to allow
> multiple versions of any given program or library to be installed
> at the same time. That hasn't changed.
> With all the effort people are putting into this, maybe we *should*
> go off and create our own environment.
Finding a way to select, then focus on keeping current, only about
500 or so of the 12,000 - odd ports could sure ease the burden.
Anything else 'will probably work', usually with minimal risk
or work to find help and get it sorted, 'if/as/when' needed.
That's all the ports set out to be. A roadmap for those who
cared enough about a particular item to get it into the house.
Port, package, or raw generic tarball, Unix and Linux alike
risk drowning in their own legacy if they don't clean
house now and then.
DragonFly has several excellent reasons to do so.
You don't see a lot of 747's with open cockpits or biplane
wings, nor Mercedes with 57 varieties of wooden wheels.
Sometimes you just have to leave the old ways behind.
More information about the Users