Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 13:19:38 -0400 From: "Jim Stapleton" <stapleton.41@gmail.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What's so compelling about FreeBSD? Message-ID: <80f4f2b20610171019n2719d671i42aa01884ee8ffeb@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4535028F.4080805@u.washington.edu> References: <af8b40ce0610151526h6aba1785mb77eb2a76e69fdfa@mail.gmail.com> <70e8236f0610151546y2e644b4ajb3f86de5bff6179a@mail.gmail.com> <70e8236f0610151557m441baf19ma2ffc0cf504f4edb@mail.gmail.com> <a25afc300610162031xb097cb4qbea67d08436e41ec@mail.gmail.com> <80f4f2b20610170417u18205402q2b9cb2eec97d70ec@mail.gmail.com> <4535028F.4080805@u.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Also, I'm not sure when you guys tried Gentoo, but as of late (within > the past ~1 year), the quality of the packages and system as an OS has > improved quite a bit, in the sense that many stable items now install > and work properly in the OS. Another off-topic comment I admit, but I > thought it should be mentioned... I've been trying to deal with it for the past two months, on and off. OpenOffice would not compile, Xorg took a lot of tweaking and a few attempts, and a few other programs provided a bit of challange. Only KDE went more smoothly than it did in FBSD. > I'd like to see portage in FBSD though, since ruby is pretty kludgy. > Either that or a different means of recording package data and > dependencies (been thinking of Perl for a while..). Where does Ruby fit into this? To my knowledge, ports uses Perl to my knowledge, and Portage uses Python. And while I wouldn't mind a few of the portage features, such as about 10k more packages, and a few of the interface/display options, I'd still rather use FBSD any day. -Jim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?80f4f2b20610171019n2719d671i42aa01884ee8ffeb>