From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 18 16:09:29 2004 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 26B2516A4CE; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:09:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp1.jazztel.es (smtp1.jazztel.es [62.14.3.161]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 281F843D46; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:09:28 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es) Received: from antivirus by smtp1.jazztel.es with antivirus id 1CJa4t-0003iV-00 Mon, 18 Oct 2004 18:09:43 +0200 Received: from [212.106.239.73] (helo=rguez.homeunix.net) by smtp1.jazztel.es with esmtp id 1CJa4s-0003i4-00 Mon, 18 Oct 2004 18:09:42 +0200 Received: from redesjm.local (orion.redesjm.local [192.168.254.16]) by rguez.homeunix.net (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id i9IG9P31057865; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 18:09:25 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es) Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by redesjm.local (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id i9IG9OWR008233; Mon, 18 Oct 2004 18:09:24 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es) X-Authentication-Warning: orion.redesjm.local: freebsd set sender to josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es using -f From: Jose M Rodriguez To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 18:09:23 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.7 References: <20041015231420.GB11786@moo.holy.cow> <200410161318.41789.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <200410161318.41789.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200410181809.23797.josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es> X-AntiVirus: checked by AntiVir Milter 1.1-beta; AVE 6.27.0.12; VDF 6.27.0.81 (host: antares.redesjm.local) X-Virus-Scanned: by antivirus cc: f-questions cc: Michael Nottebrock Subject: Re: alternative options for ports 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: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:09:29 -0000 El S=E1bado, 16 de Octubre de 2004 13:18, Michael Nottebrock escribi=F3: > On Saturday 16 October 2004 01:14, Parv wrote: > > I suppose i had to wade in sooner or later ... > > > > > > in message <200410152156.16113.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net>, > > wrote Michael Nottebrock thusly... > > > > > On Friday 15 October 2004 16:15, Erik Trulsson wrote: > > > > I almost never use binary packages but build everything from > > > > source. (I.e. I would probably barely notice if all binary > > > > packages suddenly disappeared never to return.) > > > > Well, i certainly be mightily ticked off (due to lack of *some* of > > the packages) when i lack the resources to build a humongous port > > like Open Office. > > > > > I realise that there is a fraction of ports users which don't > > > care about packages at all ... but they are not the primary > > > target audience of ports, as I pointed out before. > > > > Michael N, do you imply in above quote that FreeBSD ports system's > > main purpose is to provide packages? > > No, it's _one_ main purpose. Unlike portage or certain big rpm-based > Linux distributions, freebsd ports does not lean towards either > source or binary. This implies however both the package and 'the cd > portdir; make; make install' of installing a port need to be taken > into consideration when creating and maintaining a port. Packages are > NOT a second class byproduct of ports which are nice when they are > nice and if they're not, it doesn't matter anyway. If the package of > a certain port sucks, the port sucks, it's as simple as that. I think this need some comments. There're binary oriented ports (well,=20 better package) systems. But not source oriented package system. You can find binary oriented package systems like openpkg (and, in=20 general, rpm systems) that work 'directly from sources'. To explain this, openpkg guides teach you to use srpm (source rpm), not=20 rpm (binary). What really makes a ports/package system 'binary' oriented is that there=20 is a strict model of the final package. There isn't options on a=20 binary oriented package system. On OpenBSD, flavors register near but different binary packages. But=20 none of these have options. Only the main flavour. IMHO, the most interesting feature of OpenBSD ports and rpm that maybe=20 imported are 'build subproducts'. That is, be able to generates several packages form just one port=20 build/install. But even this is by no mean a trivial task. =2D- josemi