Call for testing: pkgbase support in 15.0

No idea if this helps anyone, but I see that on my 14.3-RELEASE-p5 I also have no no man page for rlogin(). I don't know if any others are missing. I can't remember running man something and having no man page, but if it did
happen, I've quite possibly forgotten.
 
Yeah, this moving of stuff around is quite possibly what fmc000 is observing.

I do find it interesting that the Freshports page actually says that there's no manpage information for this port - in spite of an actual manpage for rlogin being present on man.freebsd.org ... 🤔

Would be nice if devs didn't move stuff like that around, and instead focused on build failures, run failures, and dependency resolution conflicts. There's plenty of those to solve.

For this particular move, I just don't see it as something that addresses a techncial debt. Yeah, reducing size and complexity of base is nice, but unless one is involved in embedded programming, a 29 KiB tarball is not gonna make much of a difference.
 
astyle said:
Yeah, this moving of stuff around is quite possibly what fmc000 is observing.

I do find it interesting that the Freshports page actually says that there's no manpage information for this port - in spite of an actual manpage for rlogin being present on man.freebsd.org ... 🤔

Would be nice if devs didn't move stuff like that around, and instead focused on build failures, run failures, and dependency resolution conflicts. There's plenty of those to solve.

For this particular move, I just don't see it as something that addresses a techncial debt. Yeah, reducing size and complexity of base is nice, but unless one is involved in embedded programming, a 29 KiB tarball is not gonna make much of a difference.
Click to expand...
OpenBSD got rid of it. It was about time for FreeBSD to do the same.
 
And I still doubt that all about -Current are needed to be "Out of Topic".
There are clear needs in the wild to use -Current by non-developers.

Mostly, as far as I know, it's because only -Current supports any device the user need to use on FreeBSD.

I think this specific case alone is needed to be discussed. Otherwise, all device supports need to go into latest stable branch as soon as possible to be included into next minor version upgrades.
 
T-Aoki said:
And I still doubt that all about -Current are needed to be "Out of Topic".
There are clear needs in the wild to use -Current by non-developers.

Mostly, as far as I know, it's because only -Current supports any device the user need to use on FreeBSD.

I think this specific case alone is needed to be discussed. Otherwise, all device supports need to go into latest stable branch as soon as possible to be included into next minor version upgrades.
Click to expand...
Well, -CURRENT at this point applies to FreeBSD 16.0 branch...

And the very term 'support' really means that the User Handbook really only covers -RELEASE-tagged stuff. If someone needs to run -CURRENT because they need a specific (not just any) device to work, and it only properly works under -CURRENT: That user will need to accept that basically, there will be no guarantee that RTFMing of the User Handbook and following it correctly will help.

As an example: KDE used to require that /proc system be mounted in /etc/fstab. Well, not any more, right? Turns out that only applies to Xorg sessions. KDE Wayland sessions do require that. The User Handbook does NOT mention that. That's because most people who try KDE Wayland on FreeBSD - they tend to use -STABLE, sometimes -CURRENT, sometimes -BETA. There's usually hardware-related reasons on the user's end for that. This is it for explaining why the standard RTFM refrain only applies when somebody's running -RELEASE.
 
T-Aoki said:
And I still doubt that all about -Current are needed to be "Out of Topic".
There are clear needs in the wild to use -Current by non-developers.
Click to expand...
See point 2:
DutchDaemon

Thread 'Topics about unsupported FreeBSD versions'

The FreeBSD Forums cater primarily to end-users and systems administrators. As such, the Forums focus almost exclusively on FreeBSD versions that are officially supported according to the official FreeBSD website. Since resources are scarce, the FreeBSD Forums strongly suggest that anyone asking questions on the forums run one of the officially supported versions (see the links at the end of this post), for which the installed user base is logically the broadest.

In terms of 'unsupported versions' we make the following distinction:

  1. FreeBSD versions that are...
  • Thanks
  • Like

However, 15 is now STABLE and is therefore discussing it is within the rules of the forum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top