Re: Compatability with FreeBSD Ports

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 11:39:59AM -0000, Andreas Hauser wrote:
> - no portupgrade

I stated before that I don't agree with this FOR TECHNICAL REASON.
portupgrade is a hack, it sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. See
other comments for examples.

> - deinstalls before compiling

That's the update target, which makes perfect sense to allow a *clean*,
*reproducable* build. Use pkg_comp if you don't like it.

> - less ports

How much of the (partly very badly maintained) ports are of importance?
Heck, look at Debian vs. the rest. Simply because Debian has a few
tousand packages more doesn't make it any more suited for use than e.g.
SuSE.

> - important ports not compiling
>   (i hear, no KDE since April, fortunaty.net packages have KDE)

See other reply. Faking FreeBSD is not a solution either, it tends to
HIDE problems. I don't know about KDE, I'm not there yet.

> - stuff like pkg_views is experimental for years

ROFL. This is bad because ports doesn't offer anything comparable?

> - incompatible make

Which is bad because most users already have two makes installed? Come
on, that's stupid.

Joerg