Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 21:26:50 -0700 From: Chris Piazza <cpiazza@jaxon.net> To: Dinesh Nair <dinesh@alphaque.com> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, Eric M Logan <eric_m_logan@yahoo.com>, "freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG" <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: ports vs. packages... Message-ID: <20010317212650.B57776@norn.ca.eu.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0103180504530.1671-100000@prophet.alphaque.com>; from dinesh@alphaque.com on Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 05:06:29AM %2B0800 References: <20010317125349.E22316@mollari.cthul.hu> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0103180504530.1671-100000@prophet.alphaque.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 05:06:29AM +0800, Dinesh Nair wrote: > > On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > There are three main benefits I can think of: > > the fourth, for me is > > * pulling down the gzipped sources off a 56k dialup is a lot faster > than pulling down binary packages off a web/ftp site if a cdrom is > not available for some reason or another. Uhh.. not always. For example, mozilla: -rw-rw-r-- 1 569 207 12903219 Mar 11 17:07 mozilla-0.8_1,1.tgz -rw-r--r-- 1 569 207 23224401 Feb 19 19:23 mozilla-source-0.8.tar.bz2 Okay, but that might be unusual, right? Here's a random one that I used: gqview tarball: -rw-r--r-- 1 569 207 361644 Sep 11 2000 gqview-0.9.1.tar.gz package: -rw-rw-r-- 1 569 207 221155 Mar 11 22:10 gqview-0.9.1.tgz Do you have any examples of the package being significantly larger than the tarball? -Chris -- Chris Piazza (yawn...) Calgary, AB, Canada cpiazza@jaxon.net -or- cpiazza@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010317212650.B57776>