Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:51:32 -0000 From: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> To: dwbear75@gmail.com Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: to make or add a package Message-ID: <15918.51420.543091.954359@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <20030122091717.C6226@asu.edu> References: <20030122091717.C6226@asu.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[Text formatting corrected.] In <20030122091717.C6226@asu.edu>, David Bear <David.Bear@asu.edu> typed: > I'm very impressed with the ports collection. [Pat jkh on the back, though it's a long reach from here.] > I have found there are two was to install a port, through pkg_add or > the make. I was wondering that if a port were a make, if the > compiler would do any optimizations on the final executable, > therefore giving me a faster/smaller/whatever application. Maybe > there would be no significant difference. But, if I have the time > to wait, is it worth it? You can set CFLAGS in /etc/make.conf, and those optimizations/machine types will be used at build time. Whether that makes a difference to you is up to you. You can also set build options to change the location where the executables live - though that tends to cause some ports to fail - or specify what parts of the package you do/don't want built. Personally, I always build from ports. If nothing else, having the source handy is worth a little extra time. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15918.51420.543091.954359>