From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 7 11:35:17 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org 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 A664B16A424 for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2006 11:35:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mailings.freebsd@o0l0o.org) Received: from smartmx-05.inode.at (smartmx-05.inode.at [213.229.60.37]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 663D443D5C for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2006 11:35:12 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mailings.freebsd@o0l0o.org) Received: from [81.223.62.146] (port=39508 helo=masternotebo.mhr.lan) by smartmx-05.inode.at with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.50) id 1F6R7n-00040L-40 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2006 12:35:11 +0100 From: FreeBSD Prospect To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 12:35:01 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9 References: <200602071149.31772.mailings.freebsd@o0l0o.org> <43E88043.4050002@forea.ch> In-Reply-To: <43E88043.4050002@forea.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200602071235.01090.mailings.freebsd@o0l0o.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD Ports vs. Gentoo Portage (a matter of concept) 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: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:35:17 -0000 Am Dienstag, 7. Februar 2006 12:10 schrieb a non y mouse: > FreeBSD Prospect wrote: > > with having a stable OS & all the lastest add-on software installed. How > > does this work out in the FreeBSD world? > > do you install every single piece of third party software onto your > machine? no... of course not > 3rd party software is just that--it has no relevance to the quality of > the operating system on which it runs, so i fail to see how it could be > taken into consideration when evaluating said operating system. > you are given free will to install or not install any software you wish, > and in any manner. if you want to compare the level of stability and > security of an operating system vs. another, fine. but leave it at that. > whether the ports tree existed or not, you would install certain pieces > of software if you needed them. this, imo, makes any concept of > "security" or "stability" in the ports tree completely immaterial In general I am unsure, how a stable production environment is handled in FreeBSD due to the lack of dividing new ports in different states. The approach with different qualification of a software state (stable / unstable at least) is a common way to go, as it is handled with the FreeBSD OS (release / stable / current). That's why I wanted to know, how everybody else is comming along with such a system missing for the ports collection. What you write about 3rd party software is not exactly meeting the point, because you can't run a production environment with just the base system. Everybody relies on the additional software, and the whole system can only be considered that secure and stable, as it is as a whole. Therefor the add-on software has to be taken into consideration about the quality of an OS as well, especially because all that software is available using a central repository. Doesn't it make sense, to ensure the quality of add-on software, if the ports-tree is controlled by the FreeBSD project? Wether if it is in a way, like the Gentoo project is handling it, or the OpenBSD project, is a different question. -- Sincerely, Michael A FreeBSD Prospect, who is actually using Gentoo Linux