Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:47:03 -0400 (EDT) From: "Charles Ulrich" <charles@idealso.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Reinstalling, then upgrading (Was Re: Salvageable? (Was Re:make installworld error)) Message-ID: <37045.24.11.146.21.1093373223.squirrel@freedombi.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Lowell Gilbert said: > In FreeBSD, a "port" is a third-party application ported to be built from source on your system. A "package" is a pre-compiled binary of that port. Once installed, they are both tracked (and removable) by the same database, usually referred to as the "package database". See the FreeBSD Handbook section on "Installing Applications: Packages and Ports" for a full explanation. Just out of curiosity, is it incorrect to simply say that ports build packages? That is, once a piece of software is installed with 'make install', is it treated the same as any package that was installed from the installation CD? (If not, or if the relationship is really a whole lot more complex than that, then my rant below doesn't apply.) A lot of new users can't readily tell the difference between a port and package and frequently use the two terms interchangably. The handbook gives an overview of both ports and package but stops short of clearly spelling out this important distinction. But at the same time, it also implies that ports and packages are two completely separate ways of installing software when in reality they are actually two parts of the same system. The phrase "ports build packages" is a neat and efficient way of rectifying the misunderstandings that can occur when trying to give a proper explanation of FreeBSD package management. -- Charles Ulrich System Administrator Ideal Solution - http://www.idealso.com -- Charles Ulrich System Administrator Ideal Solution - http://www.idealso.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?37045.24.11.146.21.1093373223.squirrel>