Solved [Solved] FreeBSD 10 pkgng not functioning properly

[phoenix]

I've been wondering a lot about FreeBSD lately, too. pkg_ removed to promote pkgng, but pkgng is not in the base though it claims to be the default package management system now.

It is part of the base:

# ls -l /usr/sbin/pkg

Okay, so that's not the full pkg(1) tool, but it downloads and installs the latest version for you, and connects you to all the binary package repos. Just like the old pkg_* tools did.

NTFS virtually removed save ntfs-3g which also must be post installed.

FreeBSD's built-in NTFS support was read-only, and just barely at that. The FUSE version of NTFS-support is read/write, fully-featured, and actually usable. How is that moving backward?

Honestly, I feel this generation of FreeBSD developers, committing users, and maintainers are not as good as the ones before them. I'm certainly not trying to complain

Sounds exactly like you're complaining to me.

as I've enjoyed FreeBSD since 2.x but there just seems too much to handle for the team, in all, these days.

Is that you volunteering to join the team?

Personally, I'm of the opinion that old hardware should be moved out and new hardware be moved in; stop supporting antiquated garbage.

That's great for those who can afford to constantly replace their hardware. The rest of us like to use hardware until it's no longer useful, which can mean 5, 7, even 10 years down the road. Just because something new and shiny comes out doesn't mean everything else is now broken. We still have AthlonXP systems out there in use. We still have AMD Sempron systems out there in use. We still have Intel Core/Core2 systems out there in use. Shoot, we still have AMD Opteron 100-series systems in use (the original Opteron). You want to pay to replace all that hardware for us?

Name a single .0 release that hasn't had issues. 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, 9.0 all had teething pains and growing pains that took a few months to shake out. By the time the .1 was released, everything was tickety-boo and right in the world. Why would you expect 10.0 to be different?

 

[spanglefox]

I agree a lot with what @phoenix has to say there. It would appear that the vast majority of people do not like change, but, if there was no change how would things improve? (for me ports-mgmt/pkg is far superior in its ambition and how it works)

phoenix wrote:
Is that you volunteering to join the team?

Personally I would love to "join the team" and contribute back to FreeBSD, but sadly I would imagine that I lack the knowledge to do so.

As for old hardware: one firm I support has kit made in 2003. I have recently changed the OS from Windows XP to a combination of FreeBSD and Lubuntu (depending on the what the user wanted) and look set to extend the working life of those machines to at least 2020, perhaps beyond. This represented a saving over £20,000, which for some small firms, is the difference between staying in business or not.

phoenix wrote:
Name a single .0 release that hasn't had issues. 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, 9.0 all had teething pains and growing pains that took a few months to shake out. By the time the .1 was released, everything was tickety-boo and right in the world. Why would you expect 10.0 to be different?

Sysadmin mantra? "Never install a .0 system\programme in serious production!" :e The numerous Windows Service Packs for XP and above, 8.1, the Ubuntu LTS's, etc. all go to show that the .0 release issue does not only pertain to FreeBSD.

I think FreeBSD would lose some of its magic if it became a system where everything worked straight out of the box, with associated bloat and complexity. OS's like Ubuntu are great for that, but over a period time do become "clunky" and random bits can stop working. FreeBSD appears to give a base from which you can engineer a suitable system for your needs. Once it gets to such a state it just keeps on working as such.