Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 20:34:09 +0200 From: "David Naylor" <blackdragon@highveldmail.co.za> To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [alerts@infosecnews.org: [ISN] Top Ten Reasons Why Ubuntu, Is Best for Enterprise Use] Message-ID: <b53f6f940711211034s52520f23necf1aaeb07ee092f@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I really, really must be missing something. Could someone please explain this to me: Why use open source if you do not even compile from source. All Linux distributions (with the exception of Gentoo which was inspired by FreeBSD) distributes binary packages for primary consumption. What is the difference between that and using Windows binary programs? In both cases the source code does not take a part... I must admit that FreeBSD does distribute binary packages however it is much easier (both to compile and stay updated) to use Ports. I have not touched a binary package since RELENG_6_0, everything is now compiled. I get all the software I want with all the options I wish to have and all of it compiles and runs without a problem (even with -O2 set :-) Thank you for a great unified project: FreeBSD Have a good day David P.S. Did I mention that the FreeBSD kernel does compile without a problem, the Linux kernel (even using GENERIC or the equivalent) never compiled cleanly and sometimes did not even run!!!
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?b53f6f940711211034s52520f23necf1aaeb07ee092f>