editors/libreoffice disappeared from ports

[jbo@]

Offering all or nothing IS bad behavior.

Yet you're exactly asking for an all or nothing solution

I would recommend that you take a step back and a deep breath. If you're unhappy with FreeBSD you're free to use something else.

 

[astyle]

But windows update often breaks third party software, which is effectively the same as "deleting" it because one loses the ability to USE that third party software, rendering lost productivity.

If I remember correctly, last time THAT happened, it was from win7 to win8 upgrade... Simple updates never broke things for me. At $JOB, however, some weird hardware drivers were locked into a specific version of .NET, so when .NET was updated (to address some security vulnerabilities), THAT did break things.

 

[mer]

If I remember correctly, last time THAT happened, it was from win7 to win8 upgrade... Simple updates never broke things for me. At $JOB, however, some weird hardware drivers were locked into a specific version of .NET, so when .NET was updated (to address some security vulnerabilities), THAT did break things.

Actually my wife has had that happen on a couple of updates for Windows 10 breaking her landscape design program for a few days until the program did an update.
Also had it happen with her QuickBooks once or twice.

 

[covacat]

i've never seen an OS where upgrades DO NOT break things
why do you think enterprise is so slow to upgrade if it never breaks ?

 

[sremick]

I feel I have to sympathize with quakerdoomer here. While certainly Windows can sometimes break behavior with updates, one does not expect it to flat-out intentionally remove pre-existing software as part of the "updating" process. Trying to compare the two is a false equivalency, really. We need to distinguish here between "accidental" breakage and the "active" removal/uninstall that is taking place here on FreeBSD. Effectively, the pkg tools are fully-aware that they are going to remove software the user has installed, and that this is not the result of the user giving a remove/uninstall parameter. It shouldn't be hidden behind a y/n parameter as "remove existing working apps" would not be considered a subset of "update my apps". There should be logic here in the pkg tools to not do this, as it would not normally be intended behavior. Quite the opposite.

Regardless of whether the build environment is failing in the build of a new update, it should not result in the removal of the existing, functional version on users' computers.

Surely there can be a logical fix here (in the tools) to address this.

 

[quakerdoomer]

I feel I have to sympathize with quakerdoomer here. While certainly Windows can sometimes break behavior with updates, one does not expect it to flat-out intentionally remove pre-existing software as part of the "updating" process. Trying to compare the two is a false equivalency, really. We need to distinguish here between "accidental" breakage and the "active" removal/uninstall that is taking place here on FreeBSD. Effectively, the pkg tools are fully-aware that they are going to remove software the user has installed, and that this is not the result of the user giving a remove/uninstall parameter. It shouldn't be hidden behind a y/n parameter as "remove existing working apps" would not be considered a subset of "update my apps". There should be logic here in the pkg tools to not do this, as it would not normally be intended behavior. Quite the opposite.

Regardless of whether the build environment is failing in the build of a new update, it should not result in the removal of the existing, functional version on users' computers.

Surely there can be a logical fix here (in the tools) to address this.

Now just wait for the gang of bad behavior defenders overrun you with non-sensible arguments and tell you to take your business elsewhere. This happens here on this forum all the time. This forum is getting toxic due to such people who cannot stand a single instance of genuine criticism, which is only aimed at improving the OS. The minute you speak the truth about things that are unacceptable by principle someone will come and tell you that you are a freeloader who doesn't contribute so should just shut up. Everyone asking us to compare Windows with FreeBSD has already lost the argument. Also, your windows update might break your other software but DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY delete/uninstall it entirely! NO we do not have to take our business elsewhere. People like us are pushing devs to do better, not you all who are advising us to stop using FreeBSD and find something else.

 

[drhowarddrfine]

Wait a minute. libreoffice did NOT get removed from my machine when I tried to upgrade. I'm not sure that has EVER happened to me with ANY port with FreeBSD.

This forum is getting toxic due to such people who cannot stand a single instance of genuine criticism

quakerdoomer I think one should look at who is calling the kettle black.

 

[cracauer@]

I feel I have to sympathize with quakerdoomer here. While certainly Windows can sometimes break behavior with updates, one does not expect it to flat-out intentionally remove pre-existing software as part of the "updating" process. Trying to compare the two is a false equivalency, really. We need to distinguish here between "accidental" breakage and the "active" removal/uninstall that is taking place here on FreeBSD. Effectively, the pkg tools are fully-aware that they are going to remove software the user has installed, and that this is not the result of the user giving a remove/uninstall parameter. It shouldn't be hidden behind a y/n parameter as "remove existing working apps" would not be considered a subset of "update my apps". There should be logic here in the pkg tools to not do this, as it would not normally be intended behavior. Quite the opposite.

Regardless of whether the build environment is failing in the build of a new update, it should not result in the removal of the existing, functional version on users' computers.

Surely there can be a logical fix here (in the tools) to address this.

I wonder how e.g. Debian deals with this. Surely they will bomb out on dependencies, too.

 

[quakerdoomer]

Wait a minute. libreoffice did NOT get removed from my machine when I tried to upgrade. I'm not sure that has EVER happened to me with ANY port with FreeBSD.



quakerdoomer I think one should look at who is calling the kettle black.

First of all you are wrong. LibreOffice is absent in the latest releases. You must be on quarterly. I doubt if you even read the entire thread here. Secondly, I started with being upset at the OS, can't say the same about you.

 

[GoNeFast_01]

I manage to sideline upgrades issue with package deletion in upgrades with pkg lock quakerdoomer and sremick
pkg-lock (8)

My problem list from the past....
pkg lock -l
Currently locked packages:
cbsd-13.1.14
firefox-110.0.1_1,2
libreoffice-7.5.1.2
obs-studio-29.0.2

All of the above have gotten deleted or affected somehow for me in the past (I do more due diligence when upgrading now)... Fighting is futile just adapt or learn to have linux VM or a jails for problem programs.

 

[quakerdoomer]

I wonder how e.g. Debian deals with this. Surely they will bomb out on dependencies, too.

I think everyone is frantically worrying about fixing libvpx / libwebp vulnerability everywhere so everything else is at the backburner

 

[cracauer@]

i've never seen an OS where upgrades DO NOT break things
why do you think enterprise is so slow to upgrade if it never breaks ?

They also have extra hacky software put together by try-n-error instead of documented and supported functionality.

 

[quakerdoomer]

I manage to sideline upgrades issue with package deletion in upgrades with pkg lock quakerdoomer and sremick
pkg-lock (8)

My problem list from the past....
pkg lock -l
Currently locked packages:
cbsd-13.1.14
firefox-110.0.1_1,2
libreoffice-7.5.1.2
obs-studio-29.0.2

All of the above have gotten deleted or affected somehow for me in the past (I do more due diligence when upgrading now)...

Thanks for sharing. Will do that for the packages that matter the most from now.

 

[cracauer@]

I think everyone is frantically worrying about fixing libvpx / libwebp vulnerability everywhere so everything else is at the backburner

Sure, but let's be specific. What happens when Libreoffice in Debian depends on something that got upgraded but Libreoffice requires the old version and the build of the binary package fails? Why do Debian users get to keep the package? I honestly don't know.

 

[drhowarddrfine]

First of all you are wrong. LibreOffice is absent in the latest releases.

That's not what you said. You said it

AUTOMATICALLY delete/uninstall it entirely!

That's entirely different from being missing from the package repository.

 

[GoNeFast_01]

Sure, but let's be specific. What happens when Libreoffice in Debian depends on something that got upgraded but Libreoffice requires the old version and the build of the binary package fails? Why do Debian users get to keep the package? I honestly don't know.

Well, I faced some crap like that using Bulleyes they just put it in an apt repo called [program_name]/oldstable.

I think everyone is frantically worrying about fixing libvpx / libwebp vulnerability everywhere so everything else is at the backburner

Add to that Openssl 3.0 upgrades breaking things, who knows what else.

 

[quakerdoomer]

That's not what you said. You said it



That's entirely different from being missing from the package repository.

Since you did not care to read yet let me clear this. You are getting confused. FreeBSD has removed LibreOffice for those who are on pkg's latest repository when we updated.
An update for Windows does not do that - does not delete software.

 

[sidetone]

People like us are pushing devs to do better, not you all who are advising us to stop using FreeBSD and find something else.

Pushing them, isn't the same as helping them.


I prefer when packages are made with minimal dependencies. What's being discussed isn't new. Often, a package/port upgrade would cause dependencies to be removed and reinstalled. It's happened with Firefox/Thunderbird and many other programs.

If you were a more natural user of FreeBSD, you would decide whether to disable the ignore of the installation due to its vulnerability, or build libreoffice with any broken optional dependencies disabled. If you're complaining about vulnerabilities, that happens on all operating systems, and the weight is how urgently you need/want to use that program, versus accepting the vulnerability risks of using a program which has vulnerable dependencies. This is what users of opensource do.

 

[drhowarddrfine]

quakerdoomer No, I am not confused and am aware of the issue which was brought up in another thread (where I was the second to comment). You claimed FreeBSD deleted and uninstalled software on its own and that is blatantly false or at least deceiving.

 

[quakerdoomer]

Pushing them, isn't the same as helping them.


I prefer when packages are made with minimal dependencies. What's being discussed isn't new. Often, a package/port upgrade would cause dependencies to be removed and reinstalled. It's happened with Firefox/Thunderbird and many other programs.

If you were a more natural user of FreeBSD, you would decide whether to disable the ignore of the installation due to its vulnerability, or build libreoffice with any broken optional dependencies disabled. If you're complaining about vulnerabilities, that happens on all operating systems, and the weight is how urgently you need/want to use that program, versus accepting the vulnerability risks of using a program which has vulnerable dependencies.

Just because some issue being discussed isn't new does not mea it isn't worthy of being discussed. Infact, the age of the issue it makes it even more concerning.
Most humans who achieve more after being pushed to do better consider that as help.

 

[sidetone]

Just because some issue being discussed isn't new does not mea it isn't worthy of being discussed

I didn't say that. Plus, I made a point about opensource and FreeBSD, and what users who urgently need a piece of software do about it.

Most humans who achieve more after being pushed to do better consider that as help.

Fix it.

 

[quakerdoomer]

quakerdoomer No, I am not confused and am aware of the issue which was brought up in another thread (where I was the second to comment). You claimed FreeBSD deleted and uninstalled software on its own and that is blatantly false or at least deceiving.

quakerdoomer No, I am not confused and am aware of the issue which was brought up in another thread (where I was the second to comment). You claimed FreeBSD deleted and uninstalled software on its own and that is blatantly false or at least deceiving.

Congratulations on being the second one but you are splitting hair here. We people who are not on Quarterly releases updated our packages and a package was deleted. You are free to spin it however you want.

 

[quakerdoomer]

You said the below.

What's being discussed isn't new.

If it didn't matter how old the issue is, why mention it's non novelty? Anyways this getting on a tangent and tedious to reply to so many people trying to defend a phenomena, yes which is old, experienced many times but nonetheless dangerous and infuriating. You are all free to have the last words. I don't care about replying to your posts anymore. The people who really understand the issue have already sympathized with me. Go ahead. Do your thing.

 

[sremick]

quakerdoomer No, I am not confused and am aware of the issue which was brought up in another thread (where I was the second to comment). You claimed FreeBSD deleted and uninstalled software on its own and that is blatantly false or at least deceiving.

FreeBSD is often touted as a complete and comprehensive OS, in comparison to Linux which is "just a kernel" that one then uses outside, third-party userland tools with. In this context, pkg is "part of FreeBSD" just as much as man is. So if an included core userland tool is having unexpected behavior, then that would constitute "FreeBSD having unexpected behavior". Even if it begins with the user typing a command. I agree that trying to split hairs as what counts as "automatic" rather misses the point trying to be made here.

If I used cp to copy a file and it deleted it instead, I too would be upset. And even if the cp output said, "ok I'll copy your file but I'm going to delete these 3 other files. Is that OK y/n?" I wouldn't ok with that either. cp shouldn't delete files. And in the opinion of several here, "pkg upgrade" shouldn't delete packages either.

That compounded with the fact that an inability for a back-end system to build an upgrade shouldn't be reason to delete an existing installed instance of the previous version. I have to admit, I can't wrap my head around the justification/logic behind that.

 

[sidetone]

You said the below.

If it didn't matter how old the issue is, why mention it's non novelty? Anyways this getting on a tangent and tedious to reply to so many people trying to defend a phenomena, yes which is old, experienced many times but nonetheless dangerous and infuriating. You are all free to have the last words. I don't care about replying to your posts anymore. The people who really understand the issue have already sympathized with me. Go ahead. Do your thing.

Then, you should read the rest of the paragraph. The inference you made afterwards, isn't what I said at all. I told you what we do about it, when there's such an issue.

It's happened, before, and we offered solutions, or worked around it. We asked how bad the problem was, and set the build on ignore, so we could build it. Once the problem was fixed, it stopped happening, and the major problems weren't forever.


Edit: I believe it will build from ports, and it's likely to get fixed, and not run into the same problem in the future. It seems to be an upstream dependency, and that's an issue for all opensource operating systems. They either ignore the vulnerability and build it for users, or they have enough devs to strip that broken program out, that's behind the scenes. On FreeBSD, you get to choose how to get around that, which the broken dependency exists with or without FreeBSD. Hopefully, they strip out that broken dependency, at least for now. It's also an issue for commercial software which uses opensource programs as dependencies.

Me saying it's happened before, is saying, we had that issue with other programs before, and people were patient, or tried to build it, and tell others about that. Sometimes, we asked around, and someone on the forums would say, to simply disable a warning, so it will build from ports.

Furthermore, someone can build it, with a faulty setting turned off, and tell someone. Also, when this many people are interested in such a port, it will get fixed, and it will likely not run into the same issue soon. I mix ports and packages for situations like this, to make something run, or to strip out unnecessary dependencies and build times. The issue at hand, is one that somewhat natural FreeBSD users are apt to get around, by building part of the port, and by installing select dependencies by packages.

I think people should try to build it, and be helpful and supportive of the ones who make it work.

I've mentioned that ports should be set to minimal dependencies as much as possible. One complaint I have about the notions of some people, is that they seem to think bloat and features are as one. Strip that out, and give a clean running program, let the users add more features plus additional dependency hell if they want.

Another edit: the title is also misleading, because some don't understand the difference between packages and ports. The ones who are currently unable to build from ports aren't very apt at FreeBSD, and a little more is expected of them on setting up this OS.

Edit: It's your attitude.