On 2004-06-18 20:38, Patrick Useldinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So, my question is basically: did you, in your experience, find that > compiling from source *really* has any serious advantages that make up > for the time it takes?
Before I answer to this question, I cannot help noting that you don't *HAVE* to compile everything from source. In fact, if you install a RELEASE version of FreeBSD and use pkg_add to install the binary, precompiled packages of just the applications you are going to use... there is absolutely no need to rebuild anything from source. Well, at least, you are not obliged to. Now, some of us -- actually, I feel that this is a large percentage of the FreeBSD users, if the amount of questions posted here on this list is of any significance at all -- a great percentage of us likes trimming our installations; we like building our packages with the exact options and feature sets that *we* prefer. In such cases, having the ability to build from source is absolutely marvelous. IMHO, compiling a program to include _exactly_ the parts that you want it to have is incomparably better than loading up a large 'framework' and hooking into it with prebuilt modules at runtime. - Giorgos _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
