Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 13:12:46 -0600 From: Benjamin Tovar <ben@robotoloco.com> To: David Jackson <djackson452@gmail.com> Cc: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Still having trouble with package upgrades Message-ID: <20120307191246.GB2241@ankh-morpork.net> In-Reply-To: <CAGy-%2Bi8eqiiHZ6i0gFZftJ%2Bw_YE35v4QzkwgzuWvJ3%2BmMr-soA@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAGy-%2Bi-faTgPPFya8TD8rjkHG0=4E8S6Pvy2XiawXMru6z=pRQ@mail.gmail.com> <20120307175852.7de93d6f.freebsd@edvax.de> <CAGy-%2Bi8h3f4d5Omv=VZ%2BGagEnxaTNa-y6p40veRZuXR9XJusAA@mail.gmail.com> <CAGy-%2Bi8eqiiHZ6i0gFZftJ%2Bw_YE35v4QzkwgzuWvJ3%2BmMr-soA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--huq684BweRXVnRxX Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 12:57:46PM -0500, David Jackson wrote: >=20 > So it seems like a happy compromise here. You will get what you need > and us newbies and other users who really dont want the extra > trouble of compiling will get our binaries. Everyone gets what they > want and is happy, it seems. >=20 Yes, this sounds awfully good, except that I think it is much harder than you think. First, some options are mutually exclusive (i.e. ncurses vs slang)... so, maybe there are two, or three versions of the same package... and again, this sounds awfully good, except for the limited and volunteered time of a port maintainer. A happy compromise might be then to have binary packages of popular ports, which is how we have it now. Second, and I think this the most important reason, ports put the responsibility of the system on the user. They force you to make decisions on exactly what software is installed. You want the stability and freedom of FreeBSD without this responsibility, and this seems very hard to compromise (e.g., macosx and most linux distributions remove the responsibility by making all these choices for you). Is this newbie friendly? Probably not. Does it need to be? Well, it would be nice if more people use it, but if we remove the responsibility from the user, then it would not be FreeBSD, it would be something else. (Like Debian GNU/kFreeBSD, which sounds like what you are looking for.) --=20 Benjamin Tovar --huq684BweRXVnRxX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPV7MtAAoJEPrXYZkebhU5pdoIAKiH4084LX98SjjCZUr3OiUn rqm7BpOLOAwqX7ZHWMWh1vGqNGKAIk7MqpmwC6YT96vJvSAcf7pY6Zhbtx/k2e9O GR0FAz2db+WNkgSX9/1xJ5/FDCtzT1qfxo/5ZZr7/5qScb3BbKF92pmXy3dUKe/P uTsCFNgY34tnHO02vgp36bojQfyU8Dw23SbkWe33oDiyKM26sx1Uq4R266QPTziQ Jku0NtT5DQdYeMdjxP1JLugqhYhJ77gE7DdrlioE6mngbXQMXSM02uGDspsO8y+Q Aibx4oIg1c8ICWoUaWt+TSXssRA6CWA9NKj0olhXp9KKm/eI56OrrOPWzZkE92o= =CnhV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --huq684BweRXVnRxX--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120307191246.GB2241>