Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 14:31:44 -0800 From: Mike Hoskins <mike@adept.org> To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Reply to V. Velox & questions about ``evangelism'' Message-ID: <400C5AD0.7080506@adept.org> In-Reply-To: <20040117000153.GA39482@pasternak.w.lub.pl> References: <008001c3dc8a$624914a0$60d0fea9@workstation> <4008807B.5090105@sitetronics.com> <20040116162613.G91963@knight.ixsystems.net> <20040117000153.GA39482@pasternak.w.lub.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Michal Pasternak wrote: > Matt Olander [Fri, Jan 16, 2004 at 04:26:13PM -0800]: >>good question. key points I always touch on are: >>ports collection > ... Gentoo Linux > ... pkgsrc > ... propably some more build systems I haven't heard of. lots, particularly lunar. so many linux distros do this now that i find it almost completely unjustifiable to use a distro that doesn't. (running something like rhe for the sake of oracle compliance would be one justification i can think of.) not that i'm a linux guy, but most modern linux' are more "bsd-like" than ever before. ;) >>From Gentoo Linux user's perspective, Portage build system will be better, > than FreeBSD Ports, just because s/he will be able to rebuild whole system, > not only 3rd-part apps using single interface. portage was basicly a linux user trying to reinvent ports... which turned out quite nicely, but could still be better. the freebsd ports collection is always evolving, as are the goals of other sub-project's port/package/build architecture/whatever. it's good to track what everyone's doing and present a comparison... but don't bother with personal bias, and make sure you keep it up to date.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?400C5AD0.7080506>