Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 09:23:37 +0100 From: "Thomas Sparrevohn" <Thomas.Sparrevohn@btinternet.com> To: =?UTF-8?Q?'Dag-Erling_=22Sm=C3=B8rgrav=22'?= <des@des.no>, "'Tom Judge'" <tom@tomjudge.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, 'Mike Meyer' <mwm@mired.org>, 'Michel Talon' <talon@lpthe.jussieu.fr> Subject: RE: DPS Initial Ideas Message-ID: <000401c79601$2c4372e0$84ca58a0$@Sparrevohn@btinternet.com> In-Reply-To: <86wszbyko7.fsf@dwp.des.no> References: <20070512004209.GA12218@lpthe.jussieu.fr> <17989.8202.624522.136573@bhuda.mired.org> <20070512090935.GA13929@lpthe.jussieu.fr> <86r6pkzhso.fsf@dwp.des.no> <46479A4A.1070103@tomjudge.com> <86wszbyko7.fsf@dwp.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> There is a > reason why people have been discussing this for ten years without > getting anywhere. >=20 I suspect that is because that by and large the ports system works ;-) - Ha= ving Played around with a couple of Linux distributions - my impression is that = "ports" offers a much more manageable approach or maybe I am just used to ports ;-)= =20 The discussion about ports is really just a subset of the larger discussion= about how to get a proper configuration management mechanism - and I am st= ill waiting to see a real good generic answer to that debate - FreeBSD ports offers in min mind a very good candidate or starting point = =20 However that being said - there could be benefits to a structured approach = to Configuration Identifiers - whether that would result in speed benefits = overall - remains to be seen =20
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?000401c79601$2c4372e0$84ca58a0$>