On 5/9/2014 18:33, Steven Hartland wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Big Lebowski" <[email protected]> > > >> Well, the EoL was announced in January, and it is what its name is: >> end of >> life. There have been changes waiting to happen just for the 8.3 to go >> away, so when the day was reached, they've been applied. This doesnt seem >> very bad, but instead, just about time, since there was no reason to hold >> them off any longer. > > In an ideal world everyone would have migrated off, but its not an ideal > world so being friendly to our users and not breaking everything in ports > at the first available opportunity would be nice.
I'll stress the previous point again. The change that broke this was desired 8 months ago. It was applied as soon as it was legal to do so. Anyone who knowingly chose not migrate off before the EOL pretty much is getting a lesson about why that was an unwise decision. That lesson is not specific to FreeBSD. > Users may well be quite happy to port the small number of OS security fixes > until they have completed their upgrades, I know thats something we plan to > do here. Ports on the other hand is a different matter, as the number of > fixes / changes is much higher so makes it impractical. They were supposed to have completed their upgrades prior to the EOL. >> From what I've read there doesn't seem to be a must have reason for this > change, if this is indeed the case is there any reason not to consider > users? > > One example that springs to mind is the release version of pfsense is still > 8.3 so being to still compile updated ports with fixes for that is very > useful. I don't know anything about pfsense, or why it needs to compile ports, but I think you should asked them why they haven't had a release prior to 8.3 EOL. That's probably an excellent question. John _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
