Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 13:36:21 +0400 From: Alexander Bubnov <alexander.bubnov@gmail.com> To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: netbsd pkgsrc Message-ID: <c3e287ff0910060236q74cf33bbte8dd3eea27733227@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20091006085641.GB14208@lonesome.com> References: <c3e287ff0910060106h64cb8bfbkfaa35a11822fb4bf@mail.gmail.com> <20091006085641.GB14208@lonesome.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thank a lot you for clarification! 2009/10/6 Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> > On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 12:06:08PM +0400, Alexander Bubnov wrote: > > Why FreeBSD does not use pkgsrc of NetBSD project as default ports? > > You're able to do so if you like -- FreeBSD is a supported pkgsrc > platform IIUC. > > OTOH, there are some things FreeBSD ports are able to do that pkgsrc > can't (e.g. follow port renames/recategorizations by MOVED during > port upgrades). The converse is true, as well. > > There are also the following data which might be of interest. Note: > for FreeBSD and pkgsrc, I'm using the number of things that are buildable > from source; but for OpenBSD, I'm using the number of binary packages > that are available for the i386 platform (but only because I don't have > a quick way to figure out the equivalent ports count, which is higher. > Hopefully, someone will inform me.) > > Therefore, this is a _slightly_ apples vs. oranges comparision, but it > still may be informative. > > FreeBSD 20730* > pkgsrc 8458** > OpenBSD 5379*** > > mcl > > * per FreshPorts.org > ** per pkgsrc.org > *** from an OpenBSD web page; again, this is undercounting > -- /BR, Alexander
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?c3e287ff0910060236q74cf33bbte8dd3eea27733227>