Maybe you stop spitting pointless hate first? @vermaden@bsd.cafe describes the problem correctly, and never said #FreeBSD "didn't want solutions", but only that they refuse his proposal. And to be fair, I'd refuse this as well, because I think it would just lead to more confusion.

To put this into perspective, we're talking about a rare corner case anyways. The idea of a stable branch is to never introduce breaking changes in the #ABI, and as it was meant, this should include in-kernel ABIs as well, so packages built for X.1 must always work on X.2 as well. Unfortunately, parts of the in-kernel ABI needed for some packages containing #kernel #modules are not stable in practice, and, also unfortunately, this includes a package almost everyone needs on a desktop installation: drm-kmod.

The obvious solution would be to make sure to keep the whole ABI stable as it was originally intended. I have doubts this will work out in practice.

So, you'd need to fiddle with the naming of ABI versions, including the minor release in them, to have distinct repositories for e.g. 14.1 and 14.2 to solve the issue for these rare corner cases. That would of course cost a lot, much more build time for ALL the packages, and also disk space. It would kind of spoil the idea of "stable".

There could be a more involved solution introducing a second "KBI" identifier, only attached to packages containing kernel modules, so only these would need extra builds. I personally think this would be the right thing to do, but it's a very intrusive change, touching the ports framework, the pkg utility, poudriere, the build and repository infrastructure, etc pp → in a nutshell, a damn lot of work for a complex change.

CC: @joel@piou.foolbazar.eu