Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 15:19:14 -0400 From: Gerard <gerard@seibercom.net> To: User Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re[2]: Increase in the number of ports: upgrade xorg to 7.2... Message-ID: <20070608151456.6CC6.GERARD-SEIBERT@seibercom.net> In-Reply-To: <d7195cff0706081157q35a3d745l5ad5d30f952fe694@mail.gmail.com> References: <294439d20706081139l241ec4b6p83347ccb9d5847bc@mail.gmail.com> <d7195cff0706081157q35a3d745l5ad5d30f952fe694@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On June 08, 2007 at 02:57PM illoai@gmail.com wrote: > xorg is now 180-230 some-odd tiny packages (ports) > instead of the old -clients, -server, -libraries blobs. > > It seems to work okay, and minor updates are far less > strenuous. I give it five years to either prove itself or > all the developers to go mad and sacrifice their firstborn > in some wicked ritual to the sun-god. I am not totally convinced. If one small package is updated that is depended on by 10 other package that in turn are depended on by a like number of other packages, what has been really gained by breaking everything into small bits? They may be easier to maintain; however the impact on updating the system seems like it would be minimal. > Failure or not, the "modularity" will be adopted by microsoft > sometime around 2013, who will announce it as "The First > Commercial Product to Use a Wholley Modular Codebase" > except they won't spell "Wholley" with as much style. I always thought that, that was what 'DLL's' were all about. -- Gerard
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070608151456.6CC6.GERARD-SEIBERT>