any use to build from source?

[Robert Huff]

Patrick Useldinger writes:

>  True for the CDs. But once you want to upgrade, things get more
>  complicated. For example, I did not find a package for OpenOffice
>  1.1.1 in the "offical" places, although OO is certainly an
>  excellent candidate for a package.

	If you have not found in unofficial places, try here:

	http://projects.imp.ch/openoffice/

>  This led me to the conclusion that packages, in the FBSD world,
>  are considered less important than the very well maintained
>  ports.

	I do not know if it is official policy, but it is de facto true
for one reason.  It is much easier to go from the port to the
package than vice versa.

>  I agree with that argument, you can tailor the compilation. But
>  it's probably not systematical, but rather the exception.

	You might be surprised.  With the ability to tailor things by
variables fed to make (which can be made the default by inclusion in
pkg_tools.conf), quite a few people (raises hand) are doing at least
some of this.

>  I do not agree with an earlier argument, which was that you could
>  change the source. I have been programming for 25 years now, I am
>  certain that you don't change code, not even in a reasonably
>  sized project, without spending a large amount of time.

	But if the programmer and/or port maintainer do all the work
for you?


				Robert Huff