Re: Over-whelmed by ports and package tools
Also try to go with portsnap for ports IMHO it's the path of least resistance ;-) I will try portsnap, and read about the pkgdb database. If all these tools ultimately resolve to pkgdb, I will try to learn about that. I have tried PC-BSD, and look forward to version 9.0. I really don't like KDE, though. I hear some rumblings about a Gnome developer wanting to drop BSD support, so maybe I better start liking KDE. PC-BSD seems to have done a great job reproducing the way Mac's install software, by using self-contained bundles (PBI's). And next version of PBI is supposed to not need a GUI. I'm sure I will be trying the next version PC-BSD. Hopefully to be released soon. thanks! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Over-whelmed by ports and package tools
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Xn Nooby xno...@gmail.com wrote: Also try to go with portsnap for ports IMHO it's the path of least resistance ;-) I will try portsnap, and read about the pkgdb database. If all these tools ultimately resolve to pkgdb, I will try to learn about that. I have tried PC-BSD, and look forward to version 9.0. I really don't like KDE, though. I hear some rumblings about a Gnome developer Jajajaja. THAT IS EXACTLY why I don't use PC-BSD ! wanting to drop BSD support, so maybe I better start liking KDE. PC-BSD seems to have done a great job reproducing the way Mac's install software, by using self-contained bundles (PBI's). And next version of PBI is supposed to not need a GUI. I'm sure I will be trying the next version PC-BSD. Hopefully to be released soon. thanks! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Over-whelmed by ports and package tools
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Xn Nooby xno...@gmail.com wrote: I think the extract is only done during the install, and then after that it would be portsnap fetch update ? Or is it better to do an extract each time? I've always been told to do portsnap fetch extract, but I went a step farther with my alises, I have a pfu as well, that does portsnap fetch update -- A: Yes. Q: Are you sure? A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Over-whelmed by ports and package tools
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Xn Nooby xno...@gmail.com wrote: I have tried PC-BSD, and look forward to version 9.0. I really don't like KDE, though. I hear some rumblings about a Gnome developer wanting to drop BSD support, so maybe I better start liking KDE. PC-BSD seems to have done a great job reproducing the way Mac's install software, by using self-contained bundles (PBI's). And next version of PBI is supposed to not need a GUI. I'm sure I will be trying the next version PC-BSD. Hopefully to be released soon. That Red-Hat developer has been preaching to the choir for a long time from my understanding. I think he wants to turn Gnome Desktop Environment into a Desktop of it's own, making the Linux underbelly disappear much like Microsoft made DOS disappear from their lineup, making Windows the primary focus. if Gnome goes the way of Windows there is a plethora of other choices to choose for a WM ... openbox/blackbox/fluxbox, XFCE, yes KDE is an option, it takes some getting used to but it can still be used. As a side note, I wonder what kind of impact that kind of decision making will have on the Android platform ... my phone says it's running X/Gnome for the UI. -- A: Yes. Q: Are you sure? A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Over-whelmed by ports and package tools
On Fri, 20 May 2011 10:26:11 -0400, Xn Nooby xno...@gmail.com wrote: Also try to go with portsnap for ports IMHO it's the path of least resistance ;-) I will try portsnap, and read about the pkgdb database. If all these tools ultimately resolve to pkgdb, I will try to learn about that. I think pkgdb (often used as pkgdb -aF) belongs to portinstall / portupgrade, and it keeps things in sync when you use different installing methods side by side (which is possible), e. g. # pkg_add -r bla # portinstall foo/urgz # cd /usr/ports/baz/bar # make install In this case, running pkgdb -aF before and after each installation (or upgrading or removing) step makes sure nothing gets installed twice. If you use portmaster for maintaining your ports, you should be safe. Using portsnap to obtain a current ports tree is a common way. If you need it more current, use csup. Here is an explaination text I did already post to the list: Step 1: Add this to /etc/make.conf: SUP_UPDATE= yes SUP=/usr/bin/csup SUPFLAGS= -g -L 2 SUPHOST=cvsup.freebsd.org PORTSSUPFILE= /etc/sup/ports.sup Step 2: Create /etc/sup/ports.sup: *default host=cvsup.freebsd.org *default base=/var/db *default prefix=/usr *default release=cvs tag=. *default delete use-rel-suffix *default compress ports-all Note: You can use a different cvsup host and can also exclude port categories from being updated (e. g. for languages you do not use, or kinds of programs you are not interested in). See /usr/share/examples/cvsup/ports-supfile for more details, it's very well documented (here: in comments). Step 3: Perform the update # cd /usr/ports # make update Now you have a _current_ ports tree. Note: A similar method works for the system sources. Add SUPFILE=/etc/sup/stable.sup to /etc/make.conf and create /etc/sup/stable.sup like this: *default host=cvsup.freebsd.org *default base=/var/db *default prefix=/usr *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_8 *default delete use-rel-suffix *default compress src-all This will give you 8-STABLE. Use tag=RELENG_8.0 for 8.0-pX (security branch, just as freebsd-update would do), and if you need RELEASE, use tag=RELENG_8.0.0. Then, # cd /usr/src # make update # make buildworld buildkernel See /usr/src/Makefile (comment section) for which make targets are defined and in which order you must proceed for a system upgrade based on sources. More info here: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/cvs-tags.html I have tried PC-BSD, and look forward to version 9.0. I really don't like KDE, though. I've _tried_ to like it, but that wasn't a big success. :-) I hear some rumblings about a Gnome developer wanting to drop BSD support, so maybe I better start liking KDE. It is currently discussed to turn Gnome into a kind of Linux distribution, if I understood this correctly. Of course it implies that Gnome _itself_ will drop support for Solaris and the BSDs, and maybe all other operating systems that do not run the Linux kernel (e. g. Debian running a FreeBSD or HURD kernel, maybe even mobile devices?). But on the other hand, this is free software, so anyone who wants to port Gnome to non-Linux is free to do so. PC-BSD seems to have done a great job reproducing the way Mac's install software, by using self-contained bundles (PBI's). In my opinion, this is not optimal. Software should be managed by the system, not by downloading things using a web browser... but at least there are command line tools to deal with PBI, so all the annoying interaction during an installation process can be omitted. But on the other hand, this is what people seem to be used to, so why not distribute software this strange way? :-) And next version of PBI is supposed to not need a GUI. I thought it would already be existing??? I'm sure I will be trying the next version PC-BSD. Hopefully to be released soon. If you want a preconfigured system and don't mind the sloppy support for the german language, PC-BSD is a very good piece of software. Still I have to express Mr. Horse's primary opinion about it. :-) -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Over-whelmed by ports and package tools
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Xn Nooby xno...@gmail.com wrote: It is hard for me to tell what tools I should be using to work with ports and packages. I was trying to set up a 64bit 8.2 machine as a desktop environment, with Firefox 4 and Flash installed. It looked like I was going to need to track the 8.x stable branch in order to get a Firefox package, and I was having some problems pinning down which version of Flash I should use (they have a new version since 8l2 Great question. The is no best prctice as such and it mostly depends on your use of FreeBSD. If it's a workstation you probably want to install most things via binary packages instead of ports. FreeBSD is so amazing that it does not matter which way you install them, the pkg database will not care. You can add a package and the remove by port and vice-versa. cvsup and all that is mostly used nowadays by mere mortals for building the world and upgrading. if you are going to use FreeBSD as a server you arel probably be better off compiling everything to your exact needs. Precompiled binary packages are built with standard default options: i.e. probably either over-bloated with unnecessary features and security holes, or other times lack the functionality you will require. I would personally never compile Gnome, Open Office and these great big packages for several reasons but primarily because it's a waste of time, and the default compilation options are usually good for the average use. Also, please take a look at PC BSD which derives directly from FreeBSD but it's targeted for the PC/Workstation/laptop world. It's somewhat akin to Ubuntu and Debian. I think PC BSD is great for workstation use whereas FreeBSD is great for servers. I use FreeBSD for both but use binary packages for the big fat GUI applications and compile everything else. Best, -- Alejandro Imass ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Over-whelmed by ports and package tools
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Alejandro Imass a...@p2ee.org wrote: On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Xn Nooby xno...@gmail.com wrote: It is hard for me to tell what tools I should be using to work with [..] and vice-versa. cvsup and all that is mostly used nowadays by mere mortals for building the world and upgrading. Also try to go with portsnap for ports IMHO it's the path of least resistance ;-) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
