Re: DRAGONFLY 1.2 RELEASED!

[walt <wa1ter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, 10 Apr 2005, Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:

> -On [20050409 02:32], Matthew Dillon (dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> >    http://www.dragonflybsd.org/main/release1_2.cgi
>
> You say GCC 2.95.4 will be dropped.
> Cool.  Can I rip out freebsd-4.8 from our dfports override stuff?  Since GCC
> 3.x does not have any freebsd compability in it at all and we need to fix up
> a lot of ports, better to force this now instead of doing that in a little
> while...

Seems to me that this is not a once-only job that can be finished, but a
process that is going to require a team of people who are willing to spend
time every day keeping up with the constant stream of updates from FBSD.

My real question is this:  since maintaining a ports collection is not
a primary goal for DragonFly (but still important) why force such an
event at all?  It's going to be drain on everyone's time for a gain
which is still not very clear to me.

Why not just pretend to be FreeBSD until such time as a proper ports
system can be created and maintained for DragonFly?