Still having trouble with package upgrades
djackson452 at gmail.com
Wed Mar 7 18:05:34 UTC 2012
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 12:42 PM, David Jackson <djackson452 at gmail.com>wrote:
>> Especially on systems low on resources, compiling from
>> source is _the_ way to squeeze every required (!) bit
>> of performance out of code. Even if compiling may require
>> some time (due to optimization flags), the result can
>> be really usable.
Again, if you want to customise your software and build it, fine, I am
fully supportive of this flexibility and options being available. For many
people however the extra effort to do all of this is just not worth it to
save a little RAM by not loading library X.
I am saying that all features included up to date prebuilt binaries should
be avalable, NOT that this should be the only option. I fully support
customized port build facility for those that want it.
For people who just want a fully functional everything included binary
package, then they should be able to use FreeBSDs binary packages.
That will in no way affect your ability to compile your ports and i fully
suppoert your right to conmpile your ports and configure them so things
that you dont need are not compiled in.
So it seems like a happy compromise here. You will get what you need and us
newbies and other users who really dont want the extra trouble of compiling
will get our binaries. Everyone gets what they want and is happy, it seems.
I am not dissing or criticising the process of compiling your own ports, if
thats what you want, fine, please do. All I am asking for is to be able to
use binaries for those who want the binaries and dont want to compile their
if people dont want to use precompiled stuff, it wont be forced on them,
they just compile their own stuff using the ports. I am fine with users
having this choice.
More information about the freebsd-questions