From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 7 18:05:34 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 1B55E1065672 for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 18:05:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from djackson452@gmail.com) Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f54.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f54.google.com [209.85.215.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 926C58FC1B for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 18:05:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by lagv3 with SMTP id v3so10674139lag.13 for ; Wed, 07 Mar 2012 10:05:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=Tl7hy8DuxMcM5FhPAOb+H/BLhPifsoLWCMP+0tlficg=; b=tNtnbfuPr+ywccgmpoIuyi9Q2TwPVVZSLGpqP9OsHOIWy/LFRx8EyHLCOCw3g3SHOb 1VoMAUU+f4MpmX/bxU+WAUTvgcW4mOw8h9O71DUBGF9iQRB89kgl4/4hTPHeMw/+J23R 2eUScSl1CGTtGwRFGJ2Y45ZlhpcXDnN/HuwumWa3554krTNx2pBQADdabdcFmNNN7fdL SlsT2IPCDVCgDqWqmwLc9sVkJonsp5fcrKPqClAOVzTZscFf9BZdu+KEmsNckCBP+YvR 7huttZiYUmqMVPVq5mb34ocLdoMEUg4kUqeSt7mpns8HwVsp79tJqxgxH0Xoght3XUsz Da/w== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.25.8 with SMTP id y8mr1105366lbf.15.1331143066332; Wed, 07 Mar 2012 09:57:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.112.45.137 with HTTP; Wed, 7 Mar 2012 09:57:46 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20120307175852.7de93d6f.freebsd@edvax.de> Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 12:57:46 -0500 Message-ID: From: David Jackson To: Polytropon , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Subject: Re: Still having trouble with package upgrades 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: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 18:05:34 -0000 On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 12:42 PM, David Jackson 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 own stuff. 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.