6 ms·
The ports system is markedly inferior IMO to Debian / Ubuntu's package collection: no real stable tree, build from source, tweaking options at build time is enc
by andrewf 19y ago
The ports system is markedly inferior IMO to Debian / Ubuntu's package collection: no real stable tree, build from source, tweaking options at build time is encouraged. This is a moot point for things you were going to build from source anyway.
Niche pieces of software are absent; valgrind for FreeBSD is a fork that doesn't support amd64 last time I checked.
There are less people out there running the exact same application binary + underlying OS as you, which means you're less likely to find people who've had (and solved) the same issue as you.
Using it for your desktop is a bit masochistic. Widespread virtualisation means this isn't really an issue anymore - you can have a VM that mirrors your production setup.
We're still using FreeBSD and aren't likely to change anytime soon. I agree with everything aristus said.
- mberning 19y agoI disagree on the ports part. I like it much better than any other package management system I've tried. For most common apps you can get a pre-built package with 'pkg_add -r'. They really stepped up their game when they embraced portsnap and let cvsup ride off into the sunset. And if you need something special and/or exotic it isn't really that hard to build from scratch. I can guarantee 90% of the dependencies can be installed as a pre-built package.
- rkts 19y agoI disagree strongly on the ports collection. I find it more flexible, up-to-date and easy to use than Debian's packages.
- andrewf 19y agoThe up-to-date bit is my main issue. AFAIK the FreeBSD ports tree is never forked into a release branch which receives security updates and nothing else. And you'll find randomly broken stuff from time to time.