Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 11:29:31 -0400 From: Sean Cavanaugh <millenia2000@hotmail.com> To: <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Ports/Packages Philosophy Message-ID: <BAY126-W4232DCC5C83CD8C2601661CAD10@phx.gbl> In-Reply-To: <64c038660805070653v5d17139bs3d95981c9fade9a1@mail.gmail.com> References: <466267.30177.qm@web45703.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <64c038660805070653v5d17139bs3d95981c9fade9a1@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 07:53:37 -0600 > From: modulok@gmail.com > To: ewqdsacxz900@yahoo.com > CC: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Ports/Packages Philosophy >=20 > On 5/6/08, Dsiuh Djsids <ewqdsacxz900@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > I am interested to know what some of your software installing/updating > > philosophies are regarding ports/packages on either a server or a home > > desktop. For example, how often do you update your software and when yo= u do, > > do you run something like 'portupgrade -a' or individually take care of= each > > piece of software? >=20 >=20 > Upgrades...unless they're very pressing security issues that directly rel= ate > to the well-being of my server, I upgrade as rarely as possible. Upgradin= g > things has a tendency to break stuff at the most inopportune time. Frankl= y, > I'm not sure why everyone is so adamant about having the latest updates. = If > the program does what I require, I would rather have a more aged version > which has been given time to get the bugs worked out. >=20 > As far as building software, I do this as rarely as possible as well. Unl= ess > there is a specific functionality which requires a set of non-default > compiler flags, I use packages. It makes no sense to waste time re-compil= ing > the same program, with the same compiler options, for the same processor > architecture as has already been done by countless others. For example, i= f > you ran a lab of 300 identical computers, would you re-compile every prog= ram > on each computer? Probably not. If I can get a pre-compiled binary from a > reliable source, I'd rater do that, than sit around all day waiting for > software to build in hopes of benefiting from a few custom build options. >=20 something to think about to is that the ports collection will be more curre= nt than packages. Example of this is GNOME 2.16 being listed in packages collection for a whi= le after GNOME 2.18 came out. If you use a custom kernel, ports would be compiled to run a bit more optim= ized for your processor (i.e. 686) than the GENERIC kernel (486-586-686) bu= t good coding of the program should not have this kind of reliance anyway. if you want the system up and running fast with known working versions, def= initely stick with packages. if you want the latest software, use ports and keep them upgraded. its always a personal call. _________________________________________________________________ Get Free (PRODUCT) RED=99 Emoticons, Winks and Display Pics. http://joinred.spaces.live.com?ocid=3DTXT_HMTG_prodredemoticons_052008=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BAY126-W4232DCC5C83CD8C2601661CAD10>