Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 14:12:12 +0000 From: "Frank Leonhardt (m)" <frank2@fjl.co.uk> Cc: "freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: When is a FreeBSD port not a port? Message-ID: <845529D2-2EAB-4462-B9EA-7A3BFF0A185A@fjl.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <c600f924-3202-f2b4-8af3-5ad1d4c60e98@bluerosetech.com> References: <59F314E5.4080306@fjl.co.uk> <520fa3b2-8be7-8141-7e8d-9a60c6d1a1ed@FreeBSD.org> <c13f4f35-c0be-d693-33d1-5ff6b3a203f1@ShaneWare.Biz> <c600f924-3202-f2b4-8af3-5ad1d4c60e98@bluerosetech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 29 October 2017 07:17:31 GMT+00:00, Mel Pilgrim <list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com> wrote: >On 10/28/2017 21:16, Shane Ambler wrote: >> On 27/10/2017 22:46, Matthew Seaman wrote: >>> On 27/10/2017 12:13, Frank Leonhardt wrote: >>>> I've written a "few" utilities over the years that I've made >available >>>> in various places, but it might make sense to put them in >>>> ports/sysutils. However, they were written on BSD and are therefore >not >>>> ports. >>>> >>>> Should I submit them anyway (if I find time to clean them up, of >>>> course)? Or if not, any (polite) suggestions as to where I should >put >>>> them? I don't use GitHub or SourceForge (too old to change my ways, >and >>>> I normally work off-line anyway). >>>> >>>> e.g. http://www.fjl.co.uk/free-stuff >>>> >>> >>> By all means, please do submit your FreeBSD specific code as a >"port". >>> There's precedent -- various ports for periodic jobs or other >>> FreeBSD-ish things. We aren't hung up on the precise meaning of >"ports" >>> -- it's really a collection of software handily prepared to compile >>> easily and (increasingly so over time) be made available as >pre-compiled >>> binary packages. >> >> The ports and packages system installs and manages software that is >not >> provided by the base system. It is really about simplifying the >process >> of downloading, building and installing available software. >> >> The name may have originated based on the idea of "porting" software >to >> run on freebsd but it has grown to be more than that now. You may >notice >> that a lot of software in the ports tree does not need patches to run >on >> freebsd, so many ports are not "ported" to freebsd, just installed. > Thanks all. I'll get packaging. They are often small programs to make writing shell scrips easier, such as the human readable number formatter I linked to, or things to read some system status. Five minutes to write, one hour to package and one day to write the man page ;-) Regards, Frank. -- Sent from my Cray X/MP with small fiddling keyboard.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?845529D2-2EAB-4462-B9EA-7A3BFF0A185A>