From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 10 14:48:55 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C0F337B401 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 14:48:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from anchor-post-35.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-35.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.85]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B2D643F3F for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 14:48:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jeff@jrpenn.demon.co.uk) Received: from jrpenn.demon.co.uk ([194.222.241.254]) by anchor-post-35.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #2) id 193jud-0003Ti-0Z; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 22:48:52 +0100 Received: from jrpenn.demon.co.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jrpenn.demon.co.uk (8.12.8p1/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h3ALpOLX003526; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 22:51:25 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jeff@jrpenn.demon.co.uk) Received: (from jeff@localhost) by jrpenn.demon.co.uk (8.12.8p1/8.12.8/Submit) id h3ALog1W003514; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 22:50:42 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jeff) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 22:50:42 +0100 From: Jeff Penn To: Charles Young Message-ID: <20030410215042.GA3438@jrpenn.demon.co.uk> Mail-Followup-To: Charles Young , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <1049855817.93999.84.camel@feynman> <16020.15129.740634.315264@guru.mired.org> <1049939391.47109.31.camel@feynman> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1049939391.47109.31.camel@feynman> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Replacing Win95 with FreeBSD for low cost home PCs X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 21:48:55 -0000 On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 11:49:51AM +1000, Charles Young wrote: > 1. For reasons that I can only define as religious, I like to build > things for a specific target architecture - which means optimising for > the specific CPU and devices in the system. As I'm installing into > offices that have generally grown organically, there is usually no > standardised hardware. This means building a new kernel for each > machine. While this does not necessarily mean anything once I get to > install ports - philosophically I prefer to build an entire system in > the same manner - I've a feeling (completely without measured basis I > might point out) that OpenOffice.org, for example, behaves better if > built from source on the target machine. > > 2. I find updating from sources much cleaner that using packages. New > Xft? no problem, just run a portupgrade -fr Xft. > > 3. One of the companies has two offices separated by a VPN over an ADSL > connection. Bandwidth through this is restricted. I have a push tool > (imaginatively entitled 'pushtool') that triggers a cvsup, portsdb -uU > and portupgrade with the supplied arguments on the remote machine. I > use this to do sitewide updates at selected moments using a central > CVS repository. Doing this via source means that often only patches > are transferred which I don't believe is ever the case for packages. Are you aware of the following site?: http://www.infrastructures.org/papers/bootstrap/bootstrap.html Jeff