On Sunday 09 December 2007 02:26:26 Predrag Punosevac wrote:

quoted text
> > If a port has made its way into -current, it will be there when -current

> > turns into the next  -release version.  Thus all the new additions in

> > 4.2-current will be in 4.3.

> >

> > However, not all  software packages in the ports collection can be

> > distributed, such as Java, 'till Sun changes its license.  Somewhere

> > around 150 - 200 ports can't be distributed as bonary packages

> > because of license issues.

>

> Did you mean all the packages that made into 4.3  current ports tree

> will be  in 4.3  release.  I am just  aware of

> 4.2 release, 4.2 stable and 4.3 current (of course there is 4.1 release

> and stable branch)?

No -- 4.2-current will become 4.3.  The term -release is the actual

release ala whats on the CDs.  Patches created for a -release system

make it a -stable system.  Read the FAQ for probably a better

explaination that this.
>

quoted text
> I am very aware about license issues. I do not use Jave, Flash and such

> thing. I do not use Linux emulator and any Linux software.

> I prefer Opera over Firefox but I know that Opera will never be

> distributed in the binary version so I do not use it. I know about the

> license problems with Apache 2.0. So I am semi-informed user:-)

>

> I noticed for instance that TeXLive is in ports of 4.2 release but not

> in packages. That is way I was wondering if it takes more than one

> release cycle for packages to reach the binaries.

I think that might be due to its size--they're 500M in size.
>

quoted text
> > If you've made Java, you have a package which you could then move

> > to some other system PROVIDED its the same version of OpenBSD.

> >

> > The reason why the faq says not to mix things is that huge numbers

> > of folks don't "get" the complexities of how packages interact with

> > the OS, mix things up horribly, and then squeal for help when things

> > don't work.  Having a package expect one version of libc when the

> > system has a later version doesn't work so well. Given that lots of

> > people don't understand this, such questions wind up being a drain

> > on everyone.

>

> Let me see if I understand you well. The only reason that that

> recommendation about not mixing of ports and packages is written is

> that people expect to build a port with wrong libraries. Also unless

> whole userland is synchronized one would create dependency hell.

> That is actually what would happen if I try to compile fresh port on

> OpenBSD 4.2 release version.

There are changes everywhere that could effect a package.  The

pkg_add code changes, for example.  My talking of library changes

was valid, but only one part.  OpenBSD can change any number of

ways between releases.  Once a.out binaries were used; now elf

is the format.   Thats a major change but stuff like that happens.
>

quoted text
> However it seems to me that compiling let say teTeX-base from the ports

> tree of 4.2 release and then adding foiltex using pre-compiled

> binaries is OK as both application relay on the same version of

> libraries and the same version of dependent applications.

Yes, as long as you keep the systems the same, you can do that.
>

quoted text
>

>

> It looks to me that I would be perfectly ok to compile TeXLive on 4.2

> release as it is in 4.2 release ports. (To be on the safe side I probably

> should not have installed any teTeX related stuff on that machine

> because of dependency issues).

>

> By the same taken I would have to run 4.3 Current in order to be able to

> use HPLIP. If I remember one of Theo's massages there is no way

> that one could say to which version of current is HPLIP port created. As

> the current is constantly changing it could be very tricky to compile

> HPLIP on the random snapshot of the 4.3 current.

>

> Current is not for an average user anyway but I see that if I want to

> port something I would actually have to run current. Have constantly

> the latest source and latest ports-tree. Probably I would have to

> compile and recompile version of the package that I want to port on the

> daily base as a package which runs today might be broken tomorrow when

> the source three and libraries are updated. Than there is probably

> source code freeze and ports freeze. After that things should be changed

> only for bags issues. After the freeze period the ports and packages

> would just be re-tagged and released.

>

> Am I getting anything or I am plain wrong?

-current is for those who can leap around problems if they occur.  It

doesn't happen often, but the nature of -current is that its development

and things can happen.  Yes, if create a port you have to use  -current.

If you watch the CVS changes log you'll know when you need to recompile

it, but you are right: a -current port made in December might not work

in February.
>

quoted text
> > First, play with OpenBSD.  Read the FAQ.  Read the FAQ again--its really

> > very good, and is evolving and getting better all the time.  Use the

> > mailing list archives at marc.info to read about problems that others

> > have had in the past.  Most of the questions I've had, actually nearly

> > all of them have been answered by searching there.  Remember that

> > the man pages are excellent.  Start reading code, and every time you

> > see a function that you don't understand, bring the man page up.

> > OpenBSD documentation is really really good--I'd venture to say that

> > its the best documented OS out today.  Because of this, you really

> > need to read up on things before asking questions.  As you become

> > more familiar you'll see things that you want to fix.

>

> I do and I did. Every time I read FAQ I learn something new. I probably

> read it at least 5 times. The same goes for man pages.

>

> Thanks,

> Predrag