Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 13:34:46 -0700 From: Steve Franks <bahamasfranks@gmail.com> To: freebsd-stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ? Message-ID: <CAOjkAUe0_U==vjQGO77sQy=4JJ_e_ypoGpVbf1Mg62ttXATJYw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20120604110339.GA9426@equilibrium.bsdes.net> References: <CAOgwaMvsv3e1TxDauV038Pp7LRiYeH7oAODE%2Bw-pxHt9oGrXMA@mail.gmail.com> <20120604110339.GA9426@equilibrium.bsdes.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I think XOrg 7.2 or 7.3 or whatever was the straw that broke the camel's back for me, but it's just an example. Every time libjpeg or perl or python bumps the rev, I have to explain to my boss that I won't be using my computer for 48 hours. You can say "don't follow the bleeding edge", but it seems like a weekly excersise that I need some port that wasn't built with a key option enabled, so pkg_add is really not an answer. If you have all the freetime in the world, reading /usr/ports/UPDATING back far enough will usually keep you out of trouble, but for a production system, it's a touch frustrating as soon as you touch the ports tree. That said, having been a linux user for a couple years now, I'm starting to think they are even worse: at least on F.B. you can rebuild the entire system in straightforward fashion if you do need an option that wasn't turned on, and go get a really big cup of coffee. The linux guys (or *buntu and derivatives at least) expect you never to upgrade a package/port unless you upgrade the whole OS (I think it was a ploy to get everyone locked-in to the abject failure that is gnome 3.0). I've got systems with 3-y.o. versions of everything on them, because there is no good way to upgrade an ap w/o upgrading the whole system, (at least past the couple of wannabe backports that they usually do the first year after a release. After that, you'd better really like the versions of everything that existed when you installed origonally.) That aside, you can clone a linux system with dpkg really really fast from a text list of previously installed packages (which is, however, unnecessary on freebsd because dump/restore works so well - never got it to clone a linux system into a functional state - so F.B wins again). So, conceptually and freedom-to-choose-wise, I prefer FreeBSD, it's just that mechanically, day-to-day, it has brought my capacity to use the computer effectively to a halt for such extended periods that I can't often justify it on the desktop. My server on the other hand has been running 7.x for years, and shows no sign of giving out. Just keep sticking new HDD's in periodically. For a server that you rarely add new apps to, it's stellar. Mind you, it's probably chock full of security holes due to it's age... I guess the bottom line is when it comes to package management, you can't have it all, and you can rarely even have very much, and OS guys really don't get much excitement from coding on pkg managers, so we're gonna all be out of luck indefinitely no matter the platform. Steve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOjkAUe0_U==vjQGO77sQy=4JJ_e_ypoGpVbf1Mg62ttXATJYw>