From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 10 09:45:32 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A8091065673 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 09:45:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ait_mlist@rocc.ru) Received: from mail.rocc.ru (rocc.ru [194.84.224.171]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97D538FC1D for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 09:45:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freebsd.tele2.loc ([10.77.44.133]) by mail.rocc.ru (peer1) with ESMTP id q0A9N8vH079300; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 13:23:08 +0400 (MSK) (envelope-from ait_mlist@rocc.ru) Received: from freebsd.tele2.loc (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freebsd.tele2.loc (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q0A9N8IH003286; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 13:23:08 +0400 (MSK) (envelope-from ait_mlist@rocc.ru) Received: (from ait@localhost) by freebsd.tele2.loc (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q0A9N7Oi003285; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 13:23:07 +0400 (MSK) (envelope-from ait_mlist@rocc.ru) X-Authentication-Warning: freebsd.tele2.loc: ait set sender to ait_mlist@rocc.ru using -f Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 13:23:07 +0400 From: Dmitry Sarkisov To: n j Message-ID: <20120110092307.GA87677@aperturescience.org> Mail-Followup-To: Dmitry Sarkisov , n j , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <07e401cccefb$364338b0$a2c9aa10$@fisglobal.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 9.0-RC3 amd64 Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports vs packages X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 09:45:32 -0000 On 10-01-2012, Tue [08:51:33], n j wrote: > On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Devin Teske wrote: > >> Of course, this is explicit to rather serious production environments. Desktop and casual usage ... ports may serve you better if you like to stay up-to-date rather than only upgrading once every 1-2 years. > > > > We think the opposite. Serious production environments should use > > specifically compiled ports for your needs and create packages from > > those. In fact we combine this approach with the use of EzJail and > > flavours. So I guess it all depends on the needs and what a serious > > production environment means for each company or individual. > > I would tend to agree. For specific use cases, one is usually better > off having complete control over the entire build/compile process i.e. > using ports. > > However, for (IMHO) majority of users the default options are usually > OK and using packages is highly desired. That is why I really look > forward to improvements of (again IMHO) obsolete binary package format > (pkg-*) and hope that either pkgng (http://wiki.freebsd.org/pkgng) or > new PBI format in PC-BSD (http://wiki.pcbsd.org/index.php/PBI9_Format) > will gain more traction in the community. > > Regards, > -- > Nino Would be nice to know if there any plans on switching to pkgng or any other pkg management system in a future. -- Dmitry Sarkisov <--\ <---+---------- <--/