Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 20:32:55 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> To: Patrick Useldinger <pu@vo.lu> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: any use to build from source? Message-ID: <20040619173255.GA78692@gothmog.gr> In-Reply-To: <40D462F8.9050905@vo.lu> References: <40D336A0.5020803@vo.lu> <20040618203516.GA75213@gothmog.gr> <40D40027.1040009@vo.lu> <20040619141122.GA76742@gothmog.gr> <40D462F8.9050905@vo.lu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2004-06-19 17:59, Patrick Useldinger <pu@vo.lu> wrote: > Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > > >Is it possible to satisfy all the users with precompiled packages? > >No. > > My argument is the other way round: build a package will *all* available > options. It will be bloated, but still smaller (in download size) and > faster to install. If you like it, keep it, and want to tweak it > afterwards, OK, go for it, the investment is worthwile > > That makes one single package that should suit everybody (unless options > are mutually exclusive, of course, but that's not often the case AFAIK). Heh. Not really. For instance, it wouldn't suit me. I know it sounds a bit selfish, but I mean that someone, somewhere will want their ports trimmed in size and features to suit exactly what they need and only that. Building all the features and all the possible modules of all the packages and installing all of them, at the same time, is the "Redhat, Mandrake and Fedora philosophy" that I specifically wanted to avoid when I first came to BSD. I sure hope size-bloat and feature-bloat in packages does not become the BSD standard any time soon now :( > That is indeed a reasonable example, but I am not sure there are many > of them. Maybe. I'm not the one to judge; that's for sure.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040619173255.GA78692>