From nobody Mon Feb 19 07:45:47 2024 X-Original-To: ports@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4TdZN04mzxz5B0Cp for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2024 07:45:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rozhuk.im@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ed1-x52d.google.com (mail-ed1-x52d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1D4" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4TdZN015q0z4F3y; Mon, 19 Feb 2024 07:45:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rozhuk.im@gmail.com) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: by mail-ed1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-563e6131140so3146534a12.2; Sun, 18 Feb 2024 23:45:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1708328750; x=1708933550; darn=freebsd.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:date:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=+ZvW0TLXxgeSRpC3WiRt0FVypRsOzQeSXZCQQMnuNyw=; b=lYanFc9vBhVmCaL+VFXMQI1YQ38U+9NbaIZKDSWBJO2TfBLKA2al9q0Kn/8HRnFYua NSrH5I0UpUSsV+bu8/0clvNDzqIT7BW6WvtnwdBUi3VTCJXsqNFLD7HsJlemAgE/2hft moJAEyVFdD6HGsMoGdHlsVlNmKehHJLbADyngXKvRX6SMIW8kgjzn2ccbCIy0QR0L+gV IWgv5c47mZuw69cqPs7N5tDN/T5VnNK/uMQrpqCk/3LG0CHuHN/a6hqrDGabtOzQ/fgc H5nbWE6vgFBPkzcn16cJgxVynl8pFg5R5BveOJhMGjf38L2ALUFU5/wPDqgvTD7wLCEa NAPg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1708328750; x=1708933550; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:date:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=+ZvW0TLXxgeSRpC3WiRt0FVypRsOzQeSXZCQQMnuNyw=; b=u8h8527c7OBkVKFa4GF9rMwNX32B04NTpEFhvON3bPzxsil4IyDz5l1s8EN1/GQ5Ek ziPr4jcPaGKGBsjgS11VNqNm28QQjYOR9b13JuYvDwch/u9YZQz9WZW+6NkGhW5F80z6 xRJ+KlINAsq2eysQnS1KGm5RHibtrkt7cfgJZvFYpyrnxnc0krWcjHvNJpSsAzNWbllz i8ssgURqmZs1t0z25A7TprStY5P726SpbbR4e484qIBZm5WO+Dj0KTif3suCF31IXnHD RdEm3q6JjrPIEzLk+EcABm22XluEGJJDJYn1OzGKc3+uwlt68s8XzXzwaPsGKRw7CEHX XxSQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyPU1gTdGwLIdHesIkWjQqiwn3e1wu7wrsEmxgY8KzfXtdfENaR VJPgylQ9ydKoehoFXqL8jLltUQEwqGmuxmXSWOAHQkAzRK+rAKH1fuG8UmBfp40= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHzW4aVjRsqcLLLzEd6Q0UjIad/FBNBZNOSGiSJvYexZ6wWn05vWZKIKzezRbXpYZgFvUaw/g== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:f343:b0:a3d:643f:1cd4 with SMTP id hg3-20020a170906f34300b00a3d643f1cd4mr8047647ejb.48.1708328749966; Sun, 18 Feb 2024 23:45:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from rimwks.local ([2001:470:1f15:3d8:e1a1:4714:f290:1540]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ov28-20020a170906fc1c00b00a3cf9b832eesm2659715ejb.40.2024.02.18.23.45.49 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 18 Feb 2024 23:45:49 -0800 (PST) From: Rozhuk Ivan X-Google-Original-From: Rozhuk Ivan Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 09:45:47 +0200 To: Felix Palmen Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD ports community is broken Message-ID: <20240219094547.7cc05361@rimwks.local> In-Reply-To: <4ekno7iwxvdlw4xeholcrxuuazmcstxkqyidrz27ni43lzu6wg@3ro6r5b2vhoi> References: <20240218015843.34c5d078@rimwks.local> <7q6ep7m2eee6yqtxftlwkhuwdkssd74vjow55txms7lkokazfu@grrqllhefges> <20240218174921.a8082649142dd43a469bebfa@dec.sakura.ne.jp> <4ekno7iwxvdlw4xeholcrxuuazmcstxkqyidrz27ni43lzu6wg@3ro6r5b2vhoi> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.1.1 (GTK 3.24.41; amd64-portbld-freebsd14.0) List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-ports List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4TdZN015q0z4F3y X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; TAGGED_FROM(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2a00:1450::/32, country:US] On Sun, 18 Feb 2024 11:16:33 +0100 Felix Palmen wrote: > * Tomoaki AOKI [20240218 17:49]: > > [a lot about automotive regulations] > > That's a nice example how comparisons of entirely different domains > almost always go completely wrong. > > To start with, cars (and especially individual parts) typically aren't > subject to consumer customizations, and if they are, it's way outside > the manufacturer's responsibility. Here, we were talking about > breakage that only happened when you customized your port builds. We > aren't talking about security-relevant breakage either. A lot of words instead of a simple recognition of a mistake. > As explained in the PR as well, of course we add (temporary) > workarounds to *individual* ports when it seems necessary. We > certainly don't add workarounds to the framework itself unless it's > perfectly clear there will be no other way. Not even considering yet > that just fiddling with CFLAGS has the potential to break a lot of > other things when done globally. > > All I have left to say is seeing a toxic thread like this is a very > frustrating experience. So, I'll now move on to something else. > This is an erroneous policy leading to the loss of trust and users. Ports should work, the rest is not important.