5 ms·

> 5. I really like source / ports-tree-based packaging ... Some Linux distros (Arch and Gentoo) have similar packaging systems, now. FreeBSD user here. I've al

by sigil 16y ago

> 5. I really like source / ports-tree-based packaging ... Some Linux distros (Arch and Gentoo) have similar packaging systems, now. FreeBSD user here. I've always been curious about the ports-tree-based packaging systems found in these Linux distros. Is anyone familiar enough with both to offer a comparison?

silentbicycle 16y ago
While I've done very little with Gentoo, Arch's packaging seemed to me like running OpenBSD's ports tree from cvs, but without the option of an updated-every-six-months super-stable milestone release. It's inherently a "bleeding-edge" distro, which is not necessarily true for OpenBSD. (I run OpenBSD from snapshots/source and update a few times a month, but I also maintain some ports.) I've only experimented with Arch, though, and I'd also like to hear from others who know both well.
- nalbyuites 16y ago
  I have been an Arch user for about 6 months now. jumped the ship from Gentoo. Since I like to stay bleeding-edge, on Gentoo that meant often-broken packages that took a lot of time to fix. Arch has been very smooth till now, despite my using a lot of AUR packages.
  - Daniel42 16y ago
    Arch user here. The great thing with a rolling release is that when something breaks there is usually a lot of people trying to solve the exact same problem at the same time. I think I learn a lot in problem solving because of that since I switch to Arch! And now every bug is a fun thing that almost never last long, you must be quick if you want to be the first to write the patch who will solve it!
- ivenkys 16y ago
  I use both - Arch as a primary desktop and OBSD for my servers. For all practical purposes you are correct. I personally think of Arch as a collection of components loosely put together, you pick and choose what you want and they generally work together, there are no releases per-se, stable or otherwise. OBSD is a more coherently designed and engineered system, if you want a particular feature that is available in a new release , the logical way to get it is to update to a new release. If you don't want it , you can simply stay on your release and just apply the rare security patches that come through.
grammaton 16y ago
I've used FreeBSD since the mid nineties (it's what I cut my teeth on, Unix wise). I've also been using Gentoo images over at Rackspace for a while now. From a basic standpoint, the two are the same - one command and off it goes, with a well thought out set of "pre-cooked" installations ready to go. However, I have to give Gentoo credit for being a bit smarter about dependencies. On the other hand, the structure for the actual portage tree is....less preferable than FreeBSD's layout for the ports collection. Also Gentoo's portage can "mask" certain builds, basically deprecating them in a way that's really hard to turn off, and that can get annoying at times.

by sigil 16y ago

silentbicycle 16y ago

While I've done very little with Gentoo, Arch's packaging seemed to me like running OpenBSD's ports tree from cvs, but without the option of an updated-every-six-months super-stable milestone release. It's inherently a "bleeding-edge" distro, which is not necessarily true for OpenBSD. (I run OpenBSD from snapshots/source and update a few times a month, but I also maintain some ports.) I've only experimented with Arch, though, and I'd also like to hear from others who know both well.

nalbyuites 16y ago
I have been an Arch user for about 6 months now. jumped the ship from Gentoo. Since I like to stay bleeding-edge, on Gentoo that meant often-broken packages that took a lot of time to fix. Arch has been very smooth till now, despite my using a lot of AUR packages.
- Daniel42 16y ago
  Arch user here. The great thing with a rolling release is that when something breaks there is usually a lot of people trying to solve the exact same problem at the same time. I think I learn a lot in problem solving because of that since I switch to Arch! And now every bug is a fun thing that almost never last long, you must be quick if you want to be the first to write the patch who will solve it!
ivenkys 16y ago
I use both - Arch as a primary desktop and OBSD for my servers. For all practical purposes you are correct. I personally think of Arch as a collection of components loosely put together, you pick and choose what you want and they generally work together, there are no releases per-se, stable or otherwise. OBSD is a more coherently designed and engineered system, if you want a particular feature that is available in a new release , the logical way to get it is to update to a new release. If you don't want it , you can simply stay on your release and just apply the rare security patches that come through.

grammaton 16y ago

I've used FreeBSD since the mid nineties (it's what I cut my teeth on, Unix wise). I've also been using Gentoo images over at Rackspace for a while now. From a basic standpoint, the two are the same - one command and off it goes, with a well thought out set of "pre-cooked" installations ready to go. However, I have to give Gentoo credit for being a bit smarter about dependencies. On the other hand, the structure for the actual portage tree is....less preferable than FreeBSD's layout for the ports collection. Also Gentoo's portage can "mask" certain builds, basically deprecating them in a way that's really hard to turn off, and that can get annoying at times.