> > I really think you ought to consider allowing folks to be able to
> > loosen up on the so strict ports control of files. It's (if this
> > continues like this) going to force me away from all use of ports, if
> > it's won;t let me do anything of my own.
>
> You clearly don't understand the issues involved. What is the problem
> with installing ports/packages?
To echo what Nikolay is saying another way: imagine going to Sun or
Microsoft and telling them, "I'm using my own TCP/IP stack, and now
your crappy DNS software doesn't take updates. You guys should let
other folks bring in their own TCP/IP--this stinks!" :-)
At least in this case (i.e. *BSD), you might be able to "make it go,"
but you'll likely spend more time than it's worth doing so.
If this is just about you're wanting / needing to use certain versions
of a given piece of software, *if* you're careful about editing that
port's Makefile and distinfo and then stepping through each step of
the port 'make' process itself, you can often very easily
roll-your-own build of something.
Now for the WARNING: If you edit a port's Makefile and distinfo for
your own purposes you are clearly no longer running OpenBSD--you're
now running MyHappyBSD (aka ChuckBSD), and you are officially:
ON YOUR OWN
FWIW: I myself have resorted to this process of editing a particular
port's Makefile and distinfo to be quite useful in the *extrememly*
rare cases I've needed it (just thrice since OpenBSD 2.7); 'tis
certainly far easier to do so than attempting to cobble something
together from source. ;-)
That only ends in tears.
Good luck,
Kevin
--
http://www.ebiinc.com :
Background Screening from EBI
background checks & drug testing globally
