Thank you (for making the ports less boring).

[Chad Perrin]

On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 08:46:10PM +0200, Łukasz Wąsikowski wrote:
> W dniu 2011-09-15 20:08, Chad Perrin pisze:
> > 
> > If there was something broken with a FreeBSD port (a relative
> > rarity), it would fail to install, leaving me with the older
> > version.  If there was something wrong with a Gentoo port, I'd end
> > up with a broken install.
> 
> That's true. But I've got probably less then 5 situations when Gentoo
> port broke that way. Overall experience of every day portage use is
> just plain better. I hope for some changes in FreeBSD's ports system,
> we know where to look for some good ideas.

It seems we have different priorities.  I *hate* having a software update
break my software.  I would rather go through an extra step or two when
updating my software if it means I won't get an update that makes the
software unusable.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20110915/96fe6a34/attachment.pgp