Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 13:06:27 -0500 From: Alejandro Imass <ait@p2ee.org> To: alexus <alexus@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports vs packages Message-ID: <CAHieY7SZDXaRHWjZi=Af2evUGPZqW%2BvkrUAp5pD%2B8ULgS5D5zg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAJxePN%2BWrr6K83RGFGERzJGUXc24i95BemPOgxqAJW_2Lsfjpg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAJxePN%2BWrr6K83RGFGERzJGUXc24i95BemPOgxqAJW_2Lsfjpg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 12:17 PM, alexus <alexus@gmail.com> wrote: > Ports vs Packages? > > /usr/ports vs pkg_* > > pros/cons The beauty of FBSD: they ultimately update the same DB, heck even Perl modules installed via the FBSD CPAN shell get updated to that same db. My rule of thumb: use ports for everything, compile with your own options, etc. Use pre-built binary packages to install very large stuff like Gnome, Open Office, etc. -- Alejandro Imass
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAHieY7SZDXaRHWjZi=Af2evUGPZqW%2BvkrUAp5pD%2B8ULgS5D5zg>