On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Alejandro Imass <a...@p2ee.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Devin Teske <devin.te...@fisglobal.com> wrote: >> Of course, this is explicit to rather serious production environments. >> Desktop and casual usage ... ports may serve you better if you like to stay >> up-to-date rather than only upgrading once every 1-2 years. > > We think the opposite. Serious production environments should use > specifically compiled ports for your needs and create packages from > those. In fact we combine this approach with the use of EzJail and > flavours. So I guess it all depends on the needs and what a serious > production environment means for each company or individual.
I would tend to agree. For specific use cases, one is usually better off having complete control over the entire build/compile process i.e. using ports. However, for (IMHO) majority of users the default options are usually OK and using packages is highly desired. That is why I really look forward to improvements of (again IMHO) obsolete binary package format (pkg-*) and hope that either pkgng (http://wiki.freebsd.org/pkgng) or new PBI format in PC-BSD (http://wiki.pcbsd.org/index.php/PBI9_Format) will gain more traction in the community. Regards, -- Nino _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
