pkgsrc opinions?

[Iantcho Vassilev]

Yes, i also thing pkgsrc is a great replacement for the ports
collection(still needs some improvements) but i`m totally on the other
side about the portupgrade without  which the work with the ports
would be almost impossible.
Portupgrdae is GREAT GREAT tool - you would consider that when you
update an 24/7/365 machine and the opportunity to get down is near
impossible



On 28 Mar 2005 05:16:02 GMT, Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd at xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> After a long break using linux (because of hardware reasons) I started
> playing with DragonFly on my laptop again.  I had bad memories of the
> ports system -- it may have been good for its time, but it just doesn't
> cut it now even on FreeBSD, and there are additional incompatibilities
> on DragonFly; and portupgrade is an ugly kludge.  So I decided to wipe
> all my ports and give pkgsrc a spin.
> 
> I'm favourably impressed with the features of pkgsrc.  It seems to
> contain everything a package management system should need.  When
> possible I installed prebuilt binaries from gobsd.org, but even
> otherwise, everything I tried builds out of the box or with minor
> fixes.   If prebuilt packages can be made available fairly regularly,
> it could be a good competitor to Debian's apt, the only package
> management system I've seen that "just works".
> 
> What's the "official" view on pkgsrc?  Is it a good idea for DragonFly
> to move to it and drop ports?  Are there any advantages at all to
> ports, other than numbers and (for the moment) better compatibility?
> the way I see it, ports will get increasingly broken on DragonFly as
> time goes by, while if pkgsrc becomes "officially" supported, the
> breakages there will be easier to fix.
> 
> Rahul
> 


-- 
Iantcho Vassilev   ianchov at xxxxxxxxx     ianchov at xxxxxxx
PGP key:               http://ianchov.data.bg/ianchov.asc
Fingerprint:           6F2E E131 B5AB 044C D409 A201 1672 FD7B F558 97DA
note:                     PGP key changed/that`s the real one