-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
____/ TomB on Friday 26 Aug 2011 19:26 : \____
> On 2011-08-26, the following emerged from the brain of Homer:
>> Verily I say unto thee that TomB spake thusly:
>>> On 2011-08-26, the following emerged from the brain of Homer:
>>>
>>>> Nope, nothing even comes close to Gentoo's Portage system.
>>>
>>> FreeBSD ports come close though, and even have a couple of
>>> advantages over Portage. One example is easy package specific
>>> configuration with the ncurses config interface, invoked with 'make
>>> config'. Another advantage of FreeBSD ports is that they are
>>> entirely separated from the FreeBSD core system, ie. there is a
>>> very clear distinction between third pty packages and the FreeBSD
>>> operating system.
>>>
>>> Of course there are also some drawbacks to FreeBSD ports, eg. that
>>> you have to cd into the package directory under /usr/ports to
>>> install it, and less flexible dependency / compile flags handling.
>>
>> Not every single "with" or "enable" configure flag in every package
>> is supported by Portage USE flags: there's still a few defaults,
>> probably because testing revealed problems with those options. But
>> there's /no/ question Portage represents the most flexible,
>> automated way to create a fully customised and reliable GNU/Linux
>> system.
>
> That much is true. I've been looking for a system that combines the
> flexibility of source based packaging with great hardware support, and
> Gentoo is exactly that system.
>
>>> Oh, and it's FreeBSD ;-)
>>
>> I have no objection to BSD /software/, which is technically
>> impressive
>
> Don't get me wrong: I absolutely love FreeBSD, in particular how the
> core OS is a unified whole, unlike GNU/Linux. But unfortunately
> hardware support is sometimes lacking a bit, making it less suitable
> for day-to-day 'desktop' usage.
>
>> and essential to any OS, including GNU/Linux and Windows. I just
>> don't like the license. Or to be more precise, I don't like what
>> some people do to BSD-licensed software because of the license.
>
> Personally I don't mind. After all, that's how the software is
> licensed. If the developers don't like that proprietary shops take
> their code (and oddly enough there are some!), they should pick a
> different license.
IMHO, the problem are companies that use BSD-licensed software in
malicious ways.
- --
~~ Best of wishes
Dr. Roy S. Schestowitz (Ph.D. Medical Biophysics), Imaging Researcher
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux administration | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Editor @ http://techrights.org & Broadcaster @ http://bytesmedia.co.uk/
GPL-licensed 3-D Othello @ http://othellomaster.com
Non-profit search engine proposal @ http://iuron.com
Contact E-mail address (direct): s at schestowitz dot com
Contact Internet phone (SIP): schestowitz@xxxxxxxxx (24/7)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAk5YFEAACgkQU4xAY3RXLo5Y1QCgoNG5yb53tzN2S2UWXrPRRVLL
XsMAn1diQ77pUYYJlPAEjcGjMXnyWWja
=YZkg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
