From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 7 20:20:36 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28A591065674 for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 20:20:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andrewlylegould@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vw0-f54.google.com (mail-vw0-f54.google.com [209.85.212.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3C0F8FC1A for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 20:20:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vbmv11 with SMTP id v11so7293275vbm.13 for ; Wed, 07 Mar 2012 12:20:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=wYd0rEch3Gn/CDAQa6u/aJpPNUPhcy/02dStFoiKOJw=; b=vvXsJbkq7m6eksg4XVM+lDGt32PrR26aqfUhBwJVEDr32C7s/scMn0FHZqkATcwnpo wvD8sWk0njWq825S9fkj1bHSaDl6HPKoVtdxM8SKv0iYLPJwjGuhThbENlUXf3vtxjb5 GSb9GT9pU8XEQEGXzXUJg5YQNXdW1yzqnmRcqlFRtLDtyOpJU1UW+cMiY7PwlG9yIUMp OweBOYcG6HSIJjVY4sqUXN8LSwTty14a7OPqthdgMy2HD90lHOVAhVgBWZMmZlzrYfdp WU3G8zxbBi3s4jYy+/OFtrnqMBPvbzykf0zo1ZGsBMhrRV5gOwdljS5jxASZpmQqKBPa D8yg== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.20.142 with SMTP id n14mr5478669vde.59.1331151635109; Wed, 07 Mar 2012 12:20:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.220.175.133 with HTTP; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 12:20:34 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20120307191246.GB2241@ankh-morpork.net> References: <20120307175852.7de93d6f.freebsd@edvax.de> <20120307191246.GB2241@ankh-morpork.net> Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 14:20:34 -0600 Message-ID: From: Andrew Gould To: Benjamin Tovar Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: David Jackson , Polytropon , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Still having trouble with package upgrades X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 20:20:36 -0000 On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Benjamin Tovar wrote: > On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 12:57:46PM -0500, David Jackson wrote: >> >> 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. >> > > 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.) > > -- > Benjamin Tovar > It is not newbie friendly. As a non-techie (CPA), however, I can tell you that it makes the user a better user; and **that** is a good thing. Some things are worth doing. :-) Andrew