From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 16 11:19:00 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F19016A4CF for ; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 11:19:00 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.de [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 00F0243D49 for ; Sat, 16 Oct 2004 11:18:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from michaelnottebrock@gmx.net) Received: (qmail 8104 invoked by uid 65534); 16 Oct 2004 11:18:57 -0000 Received: from pD95D8E6D.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO lofi.dyndns.org) (217.93.142.109) by mail.gmx.net (mp022) with SMTP; 16 Oct 2004 13:18:57 +0200 X-Authenticated: #443188 Received: from kiste.my.domain (lofi@kiste.my.domain [192.168.8.4]) (authenticated bits=0) by lofi.dyndns.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9GBJHxT016222 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 16 Oct 2004 13:19:18 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from michaelnottebrock@gmx.net) From: Michael Nottebrock To: f-questions Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 13:18:37 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.7 References: <200410152156.16113.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> <20041015231420.GB11786@moo.holy.cow> In-Reply-To: <20041015231420.GB11786@moo.holy.cow> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2653160.g714j1ZNdE"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200410161318.41789.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: alternative options for ports X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 11:19:00 -0000 --nextPart2653160.g714j1ZNdE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Saturday 16 October 2004 01:14, Parv wrote: > I suppose i had to wade in sooner or later ... > > > in message <200410152156.16113.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net>, > wrote Michael Nottebrock thusly... > > > On Friday 15 October 2004 16:15, Erik Trulsson wrote: > > > I almost never use binary packages but build everything from > > > source. (I.e. I would probably barely notice if all binary > > > packages suddenly disappeared never to return.) > > Well, i certainly be mightily ticked off (due to lack of *some* of > the packages) when i lack the resources to build a humongous port > like Open Office. > > > I realise that there is a fraction of ports users which don't care > > about packages at all ... but they are not the primary target > > audience of ports, as I pointed out before. > > Michael N, do you imply in above quote that FreeBSD ports system's > main purpose is to provide packages? No, it's _one_ main purpose. Unlike portage or certain big rpm-based Linux= =20 distributions, freebsd ports does not lean towards either source or binary.= =20 This implies however both the package and 'the cd portdir; make; make=20 install' of installing a port need to be taken into consideration when=20 creating and maintaining a port. Packages are NOT a second class byproduct = of=20 ports which are nice when they are nice and if they're not, it doesn't matt= er=20 anyway. If the package of a certain port sucks, the port sucks, it's as=20 simple as that. =2D-=20 ,_, | Michael Nottebrock | lofi@freebsd.org (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve | http://www.freebsd.org \u/ | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org --nextPart2653160.g714j1ZNdE Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.9.10 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBBcQORXhc68WspdLARAo7hAJ4qJb4PsXShfvyYkcAtkMDuu5kE7gCfeDML zf+D4UWVgUEWW/2XhNpAuRE= =gXOf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2653160.g714j1ZNdE--