freebsd-ports

a.k.a. jkh. That's a blast from the past. Back in the early FreeBSD days, Jordan was fielding mailing list traffic and holding the project together as people peppered the lists with questions, trying to get their systems running with their sundry bits of hardware. I wondered when he slept. Apparently he did as well[1]: "The start of the 2.0 ports collection. No sup repository yet, but I'll make one when I wake up again.. :)" Submitted by: jkh Aug 21, 1994 [1] https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/commit/7ca702f09f29... Interesting commit starting Ports 2.0. Three version of bash, four versions of Emacs, plus jove.

I admittedly don't really know how SSH is built but it looks to me like the patch that "makes" it HPN-SSH is already present upstream[1], it's just not applied by default? Nixpkgs seems to allow you to build the pkg with the patch [2]. [1] https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/blob/main/security/... [2] https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/d85ef06512a3afbd6f9082...

Does anyone have some insight why installing security/tailscale on freebsd is installing security/ca_root_nss which contains a very scary message? https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/blob/ec981e26cd3128...

.NET Core is available for Debian, you just have to add Microsoft's APT source [1]. Fedora [2], Ubuntu [3], and FreeBSD [4] build .NET from source themselves. A lot of work has been done to make it possible to build .NET from source [5] without closed source components, so it might just be a matter of someone being motivated to create the package for Debian. [1]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/install/linux-... [2]: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dotnet8.0 [3]: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dotnet8 [4]: https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/tree/main/lang/dotn... [5]: https://github.com/dotnet/source-build

> This is why you see 'everyone' build chat from ejabberd. Erlang makes code for this kind of service fairly simple, and hotloading means you can fix bugs without kicking everyone off to restart. Sadly in practice I saw people avoid hotloading. I saw this behavior with Riak data store, in my company's product and also ejabberd in FreeBSD ports (this one is especially annoying as the port demands uninstalling the package before it even starts building it[1] which is even worse experience than with alternatives). Why almost everyone (from my experience) is doing this? [1] https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/blob/9d74858de3b5e4...

Agreed. I don't think the PR reviewer is calling the author a liar. The reviewer said FreeBSD is not willing to lie to its users about version, and instead provided useful info, pointing out the relevant example. Still, there's a lesson for reviewers that tone is important, especially over text and where a power differential exists. Also, the author notes: > The very first comment in the thread from a reviewer was simply only one word: “Why?” - That’s it, just one word. Why did I do this? Why work with such old hardware? Why is the sky blue? How the hell am I to know the context of what they’re referring to when asking a one-worded question? Its clear from https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/pull/189#discussion... that the author is asking why is this line needed, something a PR author should always be able to justify.

Probably useful to link https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/pull/189/files for some context. Looks like author overdramatizes the situation a bit.

They have not been stable https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/commit/a43ec88422ee...

There's also the https://github.com/WebAssembly/wasi-sdk repo which is kind of a meta-build-system for all this. But in FreeBSD we build all the pieces directly, here's our build recipes (with some hacks due to llvm's cmake code being stupid sometimes): compiler-rt (from llvm): https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/blob/main/devel/was... libc (from what you linked): https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/blob/main/devel/was... libc++ (from llvm): https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/blob/main/devel/was...

ISPC is not stuck on LLVM 7. Only fails on 12 currently, works on 11 and earlier: https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/blob/85cccf4f15c42d... But hopefully that will be fixed soon.

FreeBSD started with options and you could edit /etc/make.conf You could also make them available for specific packages, for example: .if ${.CURDIR:N*/ports/www/apache2*} == "" SUEXEC_DOCROOT=/usr/local/www SUEXEC_USERDIR=public_html .endif Then they implemented the ncurses approach which made it more user friendly. You can still change some defaults for example I have this: OPTIONS_UNSET+=X11 OPTIONS_UNSET+=DOCS OPTIONS_UNSET+=EXAMPLES OPTIONS_UNSET+=CUPS OPTIONS_UNSET+=OPENGL Here's more how to use them: https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/blob/main/Mk/bsd.op... The options are also stored in the config as you mentioned and if a new option is added the old one's state is preserved. Overall this reminds me early days with smartphones and iPhone users making excuses why not having copy&paste was

The title is highly misleading. First, it's the ancient GCC 4.2.1 from 2007. Next, it's removed from the FreeBSD build system, which means it's no longer used in the internal development of FreeBSD and you can no longer build FreeBSD with GCC. Meanwhile, GCC is still maintained for userspace and the latest GCC 9 is included in the FreeBSD Port [0], you can install it on your machine for your personal use. Finally, the commit message said "At this time all supported architectures either use in-tree Clang, or rely on external toolchain (i.e., a contemporary GCC version from ports)", so I assume even with GCC support removed, you can still build FreeBSD, if you insist, with an external copy of modern GCC. Suggested alternative title: FreeBSD has Removed GCC from Build Infrastructure. [0] https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/blob/master/M

Chromium is terrible for the BSDs, though - it requires something like 300 patches to build: https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/tree/master/www/chr... Mozilla, unlike Google, is not hostile to the idea of receiving patches from BSDs.