Ports system documentation.

Ports system documentation.

Post by talo » Thu, 07 Sep 2006 00:48:29



Hi,

i have written a rather long paper describing the Freebsd port system, and
comparing it with the Debian system. This has some information which is, i
hope, orthogonal to that in the Porter's handbook. You can find the TeX
source, the PDF and an html version here:
http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ~talon/freebsdports.html (resp .pdf .tex).
Of course everyone is free to copy part or all, and to improve or criticize.
I hope this may be useful for beginners wanting to learn "how it works" in
more details.



--

Michel TALON
 
 
 

Ports system documentation.

Post by Balwinder » Thu, 07 Sep 2006 04:47:08


Very good paper, thanks for bringing up such a good work!

I'm not quoting all your relevant lines verbatim here, but I agree that
we should learn why Debian and now a days also Ubuntu are that much
popular distributions among Linux users.

Regards,
--
Dr Balwinder S "bsd" Dheeman Registered Linux User: #229709
Anu's Linux@HOME Machines: #168573, 170593, 259192
Chandigarh, UT, 160062, India Distros: Ubuntu, Fedora, Knoppix
Home: http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ~bsd/ Visit: http://www.yqcomputer.com/

 
 
 

Ports system documentation.

Post by gel » Sat, 09 Sep 2006 23:51:49


Because it has an excellent package system (deb) and a very impressive
package management program (dpkg) with a great set of interfaces (apt,
aptitude); upgrades simply work, without trouble, even between non
continuous versions (upgrading from 3.0 to 3.2 for instance).

--
Saludos,
gel
 
 
 

Ports system documentation.

Post by spam » Sun, 10 Sep 2006 01:24:48


Oddly enough, curious about the hype, I just put Ubuntu 6.06LTS D/T onto
an older (400mhz/256M) box which was previously running FreeBSD 6.1-R
with gnome (you can believe that I thought twice before committing to the
install).

Ubuntu looks good, and comes with a well considered gnome environment,
with a good application mix (OpenOffice 2.0, Gimp, Firefox etc. etc.), and
a bunch of gui based sys admin apps, all of which are installed by
default. It appears that Ubuntu is trying to take a run at being a
desktop alternative to a nameless west coast outfit who also makes OS'es,
albeit more expensive and less reliable.

Certainly a cute little turnkey desktop platform, but it seems to me that
there is a keystroke/mouseclick lag compared to the similar gnome
environment running FreeBSD 6.1-R on the same box. I have done no
benchmarks to prove it, and I have no supporting data, it is just a
feeling I get (and may be a BSD bias).

I have not played with the Ubuntu package manager as of yet, but as the
box is now surplus I can afford to play with Ubuntu a while longer and see
if it is anywhere near as good FreeBSD. I will admit that the desktop
bundle has a lot of thought put into it, and other Linux distro's and even
the BSD's could learn a thing or two about cobbling together a useable and
complete end user bundle from Ubuntu 6.06.1.

Oh, as a side note, I had great difficulty in installing from the live
system cd, and if you are going to repeat my experiment, then use the
ubuntu-6.06.1-alternate-i386.iso image from the mirrors to burn your
install cd. It is a character based install, but it was the only one I
actually got to work.

Cheers,
Rob.
 
 
 

Ports system documentation.

Post by talo » Sun, 10 Sep 2006 04:53:12


I have the same feeling on my machine. I multiboot with Ubuntu and FreeBSD
and i always have the impression that FreeBSD is slightly faster. This being
said it is well known that Linux is more performant on > 4 multiprocessor
machines. Anyways, as soon as you try to compare apt and portupgrade, then you
don't have any problem finding which one works faster and better. When
i read some posts on freebsd-ports, i wonder on which planet these people
are living. Have they *tried* a Debian distro once in their lives? they
could get a shock :-(


I have installed from the live cd without problem. Different machines
different experiences, it seems.


--

Michel TALON