Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 18:49:59 +0100 From: RW <list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Fwd: package vs ports question Message-ID: <200603271850.00548.list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com> In-Reply-To: <200603271002.53806.donaldjoneill@gmail.com> References: <4427C93B.2050805@greenmeadow.ca> <200603271649.56334.list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com> <200603271002.53806.donaldjoneill@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 27 March 2006 17:02, Donald J. O'Neill wrote: > On Monday 27 March 2006 09:49, RW wrote: > > On Monday 27 March 2006 14:20, Norberto Meijome wrote: > > > make package will actually make the package and install it for you, > > > you dont need to do a pkg_add after that (yes, a bit > > > counter-intuitive, but really handy) > > > > Make package creates a package out of an installed port (it will > > install the port first, if neccessary). It doesn't install the > > package - there would be no point. > > _______________________________________________ > > 'make install' builds a package from the port and installs it. 'make > package' builds a package and installs it, it also saves it in > compressed form so it can be reinstalled if necessary. My point was that it doesn't create a package file and then install it, which is how I read it. There is a strong unwritten convention in the language of FreeBSD that you don't refer to installing from a port as installing a package - even though it's technically correct.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200603271850.00548.list-freebsd-2004>