On 03/10/2016 14:11, Mike Clarke wrote:
On Mon, 3 Oct 2016 13:11:43 +0000
Grzegorz Junka <li...@gjunka.com> wrote:
Shouldn't all packages default to noX dependencies? If I am not mistaken
FreeBSD is predominantly a server-side system, with X running only
occasionally
I'd disagree with that. I don't know whether or not the majority of
FreeBSD installations are servers or personal computers but the chances
are that the majority of server installations will have relatively few
packages installed whereas most PC's are likely to make use of far
more packages and are also likely to be using X. Building from ports
to get the required options would be a much bigger task for these
installations than it would be for the servers.
I have been wondering if it would be possible to have two distinct set
of packages compiled automatically, one tailored for X and one for the
console. It seems that requirements of both environment are quite
opposite. The server-side requires small amount of packages without X
because it wants to run the system headless, as long as possible and
without interruptions and restarts. Whereas the X/PC environment always
wants to have everything latest and newest. In the Linux world they
would just create a new distribution, even in the BSD world there is
PC-BSD/TrueOS. But we have ports and can re-use the same base for two
distinctive set of packages. I don't believe we can create pre-compiled
packages for FreeBSD in such a way, that both camps are happy (which
this thread is one of many signs of).
Grzegorz
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
