On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 04:42:40PM +0000, Michel Talon wrote: > > I mean that the concept of maintaining a full set of binary packages > which has been verified by the distribution maintainers and remain > usable for an extended period of time, combined with an effective > binary upgrader (apt-get, aptitude), is light years ahead, for ease of > use and convenience, to a rolling release style "bazar" like FreeBSD > ports, combined with tools like portupgrade, which sort of work only > when you spend all your time running them daily, after having sacrificed > a young virgin to the gods. I concede that the FreeBSD way allows to have > very up to date ports, and to be in control of compilation options and > so on. Personnally i don't have much use for these benefits.
I don't have the kinds of problems you imply. Portupgrade works great,
even if I don't touch it for a week or so, at least for me. There are
benefits to a rolling release process, too:
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=4150
--
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
pgp4WYGFexWRM.pgp
Description: PGP signature
