Re: FreeBSD vs. RedHat

From: Louis LeBlanc (freebsd_at_keyslapper.org)
Date: 10/02/03

  • Next message: David J Ducshcher: "Re: FreeBSD vs. RedHat"
    Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 09:39:56 -0400
    To: "FreeBSD-Questions (Request)" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
    
    

    On 10/01/03 10:02 PM, SoloCDM sat at the `puter and typed:
    > <SNIP>
    >
    > Is there FreeBSD ISOs with all the packages included.

    That would be a bit excessive

    > I'm tired of waiting for RPMs, when they are usually first made into
    > tarballs. Would a person prefer Slackware, RedHat (good installation
    > package, but they complicate matters with RPMS and don't conform to
    > the same directories as tarballs), or FreeBSD?

    Well, the RPS are made FROM the tarballs, aren't they? A lot of that
    software is written on/for Linux, but building RPMs is one extra step
    that a lot of developers just haven't bothered to learn. So they
    distribute the tarball, which is practically universally understood,
    and let someone else build the RPM.

    Of course this *doesn't* mean that FreeBSD always has first access to
    the new version in a port. Someone still has to write the port,
    which, frankly is a little more work than building an RPM. I've done
    both, but I haven't done the RPM since I moved to FreeBSD over 2 years
    ago.

    > I noticed a lot of ISPs use FreeBSD. Is it more widely accepted as
    > the best up-to-date in packages?

    In the past, FreeBSD has had a much better security reputation than
    Linux, and the VM manager has been much better. I was always
    inundated with crack attempts when I was with MediaOne, and as far as
    the VM, I've seen an indentical window manager config (same versions
    of XFree86, Fvwm2, etc, on identical machines) take three times as
    long on Linux as FreeBSD - though that was over 2 years ago, and I
    don't know how Linux has progressed since then.

    > Does FreeBSD conform to the directories that tarballs prefer?

    Not always. That's the point. RPMs don't have to either, but both
    depend on the software writer's install procedure. Most gnu and open
    source software is written with a configure tool that allows you to
    specify the install prefix.

    The port writer typically puts the software in a directory that won't
    lead to the proliferation of /usr/local/ subdirectories. But the
    package registry keeps close track of the locations of every file in
    the package. It keeps the cruft rating surprisingly low. When a port
    is upgraded (like with portupgrade) the system removes all the files
    belonging to the old system. Also, if you want to install a port, the
    system will automatically install or build all dependencies specified
    in the port. Last time I installed RedHat, it only told you what was
    missing - one - package - at - a - time, so you'd try the install, go
    find and install the RPM it complained about, then try the install
    again, go get the next RPM it complained about . . . and this is a
    recursive problem. I once had to do this more than 15 times between
    the original RPM I wanted (don't remember what it was) and the
    dependencies, and the dependencies' dependencies, . . .

    With the ports system, you go to the port you want installed, and it's
    simply

    $ make install clean

    which will install all dependencies you don't have installed, or you
    use portupgrade:

    $ portupgrade -RN apache2

    and all the dependencies that need upgrading will also be upgraded.

    And 99% of the time, none of it requires any more effort than that.

    > --
    > Note: When you reply to this message, please include the mailing
    > list address and my email address in To: and/or Cc: with
    > any proper combination

    Whups. Didn't see that before . . .
    I'll have to go back and get it . . .

    Lou

    -- 
    Louis LeBlanc               leblanc@keyslapper.org
    Fully Funded Hobbyist, KeySlapper Extrordinaire :)
    http://www.keyslapper.org                     ԿԬ
    Eureka!
        -- Archimedes
    _______________________________________________
    freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
    http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
    To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
    

  • Next message: David J Ducshcher: "Re: FreeBSD vs. RedHat"

    Relevant Pages

    • Is FreeBSD ready for desktop (Mozilla Flash)
      ... monitor,, somehow the install fails to detect ... "Macromedia Flash plugin is not available for FreeBSD. ... I quote again "Install the www/linuxpluginwrapper port. ... servers, ...
      (comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc)
    • New software uploaded by Denise on Oct 23 07:10:00 -4 2006
      ... and starting compiling the 'bar' port. ... and now where should you install your terminators? ... filter option may run a filter on the wrong type of file and cause ... FreeBSD does not currently support IBM's microchannel bus. ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: Bystander shot by a spam filter.
      ... fixed, and proven harmless, FreeBSD should stop distributing this product. ... The port is not installed by default, ... >other internet denizens are also affected. ... Users (people who install this ...
      (FreeBSD-Security)
    • Re: FreeBSD Ports Security Advisory: FreeBSD-SA-01:07.xfree86
      ... without upgrading to XFree86 4.01. ... Subject: FreeBSD Ports Security Advisory: FreeBSD-SA-01:07.xfree86 ... > The XFree86-3.3.6 port, versions prior to 3.3.6_1, has multiple ... > 2) Deinstall the old package and install an XFree86-4.0.2 package ...
      (FreeBSD-Security)
    • Re: rpm equivalent to pkg_add -r?
      ... I am a newbie in freebsd with ambitions to become a master:) and up ... collection and freebsd packages and I found them better than rpm. ... You can compile and install httpd from ports collection with the ... Or you can install from a prebuilt binary package with the command ...
      (freebsd-questions)