HEADS UP: ports/ and 10.0-CURRENT

[Brandon Gooch]

On Sep 27, 2011 10:04 AM, "Chris Rees" <crees at freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> On 27 September 2011 10:18, Anton Shterenlikht <mexas at bristol.ac.uk>
wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 10:28:49AM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote:
> >> On 09/27/11 08:35, h h wrote:
> >> >Kevin Oberman<kob6558 at gmail.com>  writes:
> >> >
> >> >>On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovett<ade at freebsd.org>  wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>>With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to
be
> >> >>>expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>The issue stems from configure scripts (to choose something
completely
> >> >>>at random) assuming that FreeBSD would never jump to a double-digit
> >> >>>major version number, and as such, various regexps for "freebsd1*"
(ie:
> >> >>>FreeBSD 1.1.x) are now matching "freebsd10".
> >> >[...]
> >> >>
> >> >>aDe,
> >> >>
> >> >>Could an entry to this effect be added to UPDATING (with a matching
> >> >>entry when ports/ is "unbroken").
> >> >
> >> >Also mention a workaround, e.g.
> >> >
> >> >   $ export UNAME_r='9.9-BLAH'
> >>
> >>
> >> Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin 10 'X' for
> >> their tenth version of their operating system ...
> >
> > At least there will be a long rest after
> > the move to 10 is complete.. until FreeBSD 100.
> >
>
>
> I'm afraid not;
>
> freebsd2*)
>
> We'll be just as screwed at 20.
>
> Hopefully we can fix that at the same time.
>
> Chris
>

Now is the moment we grab 'BSD', dropping the 'Free', and start fresh at a
1.x point... Rebrand and be more conservative with release numbering...

Crazy right? Sorry for the noise...

(Goes off to check the status of bsd.org)

-Brandon