Jamie Bowden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 10 Jul 2001, Rajappa Iyer wrote:
> :One of the nice things I like about FreeBSD (and I daresay I'm not
> :alone in this) is that when I install it, I know that I'll get a
> :kernel with a corresponding full and fun
system' as a bunch of (meta)packages as the
thin edge of the wedge---pretty soon FreeBSD will resemble the
hodge-podge collection of different (often conflicting) packages that
Linux is.
Rajappa
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a.k.a. Rajappa Iyer.
They also surf who stand in the
http://www.sysadminmag.com/articles/2001/0107/0107a/0107a.htm
Any obvious reasons why FreeBSD performed so poorly for these people?
rsi
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a.k.a. Rajappa Iyer.
They also surf who stand in the waves.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "
rust as well. I see
no reason to be concerned about the demise of FreeBSD as we know and
love it.
Rajappa
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a.k.a. Rajappa Iyer.New York, New York.
Where would we be without rhetorical questions?
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
Tony Finch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Rajappa Iyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >1. It does a terrible job at tracking dependencies, IMHO. If you
> > install packages A, B and C at the same time and A depends on C,
> > it's not smart enough to inst
which lets you
fetch binary, compiled packages instead of source tarballs and still
do: "cd /usr/ports/x11/gnome; make -DUSE_BINARY_PACKAGES install"
Thanks,
Rajappa
--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a.k.a. Rajappa Iyer.New York, New York.
We're too busy mopping th
age for. In an ideal world, it would reduce the
burden of the ports maintainers and increase the number of packages
available off the bat for FreeBSD. (Hey, one can hope, can't one?)
This would also allow FreeBSD to share ports with {Net|Open}BSD.
What do people think?
rsi
--
a.k.a. Rajappa
7 matches
Mail list logo
