Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 09:46:20 +0100 From: "martinko" <martinkov@pobox.sk> To: Norberto Meijome <freebsd@meijome.net> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Ports vs. Gentoo Portage (a matter of concept) Message-ID: <20060208082921.M93331@pobox.sk> In-Reply-To: <43E93475.4060909@meijome.net> References: <200602071149.31772.mailings.freebsd@o0l0o.org> <43E88C64.40007@xs4all.nl> <43E8A7B3.3090707@meijome.net> <dsav13$99q$1@sea.gmane.org> <43E93475.4060909@meijome.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 10:59:49 +1100, Norberto Meijome wrote > martinko wrote: > > > > > i already raised the following issue with pkgtools.sonf here on MLs some > > time ago but i didn't get a response i'd be happy with: > > i want to make sure that a certain port will be compiled with a certain > > make argument/flag. there are MAKE_ARGS in port tools but these are > > used/applied differently depending on whether the port is compiled > > directly or indirectly via a metaport and also if it's being compiled > > for the 1st time or again. :-(( > > hmm i wasn't aware of those subtleties... portupgrade + pkgtools.conf > seem to behave pretty well to me (again, maybe they are not compiling > the way I need with no negative side effects that I can notice. > > > > > besides, i should say i'm using mainly FreeBSD and occasionally i'm > > playing with Gentoo but i consider the quality and stability of ports > > provided to be (much) better than that of apps via portage. also, > > syncing and updating portage tree is much more heavy (by which i mean it > > takes much longer and downloads much more data) than updating ports > > collection > > ah, definitely - fbsd port system seems to me much more stable and well > behaved (it works as it should). and coupled with packages, it's just > great. > > > (especially since portsnap has appeared). > > i have to say i still use cvsup...will have to give portsnap a try cvsup is good. especially if you don't upgrade often. OTOH, portsnap is more secure, network load friendly, and works behind proxies. and prepares ports index file for you, too. > > > not to mention that > > Gentoo's system/base layout is still heavy evolving and frequent > > changes to the format, contents and location of their /etc files are > > happening quite so often, which wouldn't make any admin too happy. > > > > true. though the system/layout it is evolving to is quite nice, IMHO. > the "evolving too fast" feeling may come from being linux after all > ;) Again, i think it's the best distro around for powerusers. > > Beto i just don't know why they have to reinvent everything. freebsd's config files overriding some defaults are pretty good idea, imho. on gentoo i remember to have to merge my amended config files every time they added/changed something. generally, this is one of the issues i see with linux. every distro tries to reinvent the wheel and do the stuff differently. i think i quite understand desire of their developers to create something new and best, but unix is where it is because of its heritage and stability/compatibility, not because it's been rewritten/reinvented from scratch every so often. well, old unix gurus and developers with many years of experience and knowledge are what i believe set BSDs apart from linux, which reminds me of my young programming days and all that lack of knowledge and experience and all those mistakes i've been through. :o) m.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060208082921.M93331>