Re: ports versus packages

From: Adam (blueeskimo_at_gmx.net)
Date: 05/23/03

  • Next message: E. J. Cerejo: "Re: JDK13 fails to build"
    To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
    Date: 23 May 2003 00:48:18 -0400
    
    
    

    On Fri, 2003-05-23 at 00:14, David Banning wrote:
    > I was talking to a debian Linux guy the other day who preferred debians'
    > precompiled packages because, as he put it, "you just load it, and go,
    > and it always works -."
    >
    > What is the benifit for us to compile versus just installing the package?
    > - and how come we tend to use the pre-compiled packages less than some
    > of our fellow *nix users? - (at least that's my perception)

    To state the obvious, there are two reasons why someone would compile a
    port instead of installing a precompiled binary:

    1) You get to customize how the software is compiled, as well as what
    modules are linked in (eg, Mozilla)

    2) You feel comfortable that the resulting binary is the compiled
    version of the source you started with, which is directly reviewable.

    Both of these reasons are major aspects of the open software movement. I
    think the reason why Linux users prefer precompiled packages is that
    they've somewhat lost the spirit of open source software. The Linux
    community these days is flooded with Microsoft-bashing kiddies that just
    want to be cool, but don't really care much about the 'beauty' of *nix.
    This is why you see most people using Redhat, SuSE, and Mandrake.

    Of course, this is just my opinion. However, I do find that BSD people
    are much more intellectually and philosophically connected to the
    movement than our Linux friends.

    -- 
    Adam <blueeskimo@gmx.net>
    
    



  • Next message: E. J. Cerejo: "Re: JDK13 fails to build"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Video editing in Linux?
      ... >30ukp, and even then a typical winmodem was 25ukp, so the difference ... of course Linux may deal with this alot ... Most notably the IDE drivers way exceed that of VIA's. ... So i would need to compile them? ...
      (alt.linux)
    • Re: Paying developers to get features faster
      ... existing Open Source, ... This is true even with the Linux Kernel compile. ... >compile is atleast a lot better than a screen full of warning messages. ...
      (comp.os.linux.misc)
    • Re: Paying developers to get features faster
      ... existing Open Source, ... This is true even with the Linux Kernel compile. ... >compile is atleast a lot better than a screen full of warning messages. ...
      (comp.os.linux.development.system)
    • Re: Paying developers to get features faster
      ... existing Open Source, ... This is true even with the Linux Kernel compile. ... >compile is atleast a lot better than a screen full of warning messages. ...
      (comp.security.misc)
    • Re: Paying developers to get features faster
      ... existing Open Source, ... This is true even with the Linux Kernel compile. ... >compile is atleast a lot better than a screen full of warning messages. ...
      (comp.os.linux.security)