Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 15:59:47 +0200 From: Sebastian Schulze Struchtrup <sebastian@struchtrup.de> To: Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: alternative options for ports Message-ID: <4173CC53.4020602@struchtrup.de> In-Reply-To: <200410151419.44415.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> References: <416C0DE8.3000004@struchtrup.com> <20041014095355.GA61134@elendil.ru> <20041014135041.GB4625@iib.unsam.edu.ar> <200410151419.44415.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>IMHO, what we're discussing here, as many people more or less >>directly pointed out, are the differences between a binary >>oriented installation system, versus the source oriented >>FreeBSD ports system. >> >> >This is a misunderstanding on your part. FreeBSD (ports) isn't "source >oriented". Gentoo is source oriented. Packages built from ports are not just >some weird side-product, port maintainers need to actively care about the >packages produced from their ports. > > I think this issue is quite important as there seems to be some misunderstanding by some people (including myself). This should probably be put somewhere into the porter's handbook. Probably into section 17 Dos and Don'ts. I will check where it would fit best and prepare something.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4173CC53.4020602>