alternative options for ports

[Parv]

I suppose i had to wade in sooner or later ...


in message <200410152156.16113.michaelnottebrock at gmx.net>,
wrote Michael Nottebrock thusly...
>
> On Friday 15 October 2004 16:15, Erik Trulsson wrote:
> 
> > I almost never use binary packages but build everything from
> > source. (I.e. I would probably barely notice if all binary
> > packages suddenly disappeared never to return.)

Well, i certainly be mightily ticked off (due to lack of *some* of
the packages) when i lack the resources to build a humongous port
like Open Office.


> I realise that there is a fraction of ports users which don't care
> about packages at all ...  but they are not the primary target
> audience of ports, as I pointed out before.

Michael N, do you imply in above quote that FreeBSD ports system's
main purpose is to provide packages?

Not a primary target?  I would rather install from FreeBSD ports
system than from the software source due to availability of
maintenance tools/options: install, deinstall, options specification
(Not OPTIONS but CONFIGURE_ARGS), local patches, edit Makefile, &
such.


  - Parv

--