Da= vid,
Sorry for top posting - my 'phone makes it difficult.
Do= we really have to have this debate again?
You made the same points = a short while ago, and there was a long
on-list debate about the strengths = and shortfalls of the existing
ports and packages system.
I don'
On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 10:04:35PM -0500, David Jackson wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 6:51 PM, Polytropon wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 12:05:37 -0500, David Jackson wrote:
> > > > Many of your issues are non-issues, as your suggestions were
> > > > implemented in some form long ago. For exa
On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 10:04:35PM -0500, David Jackson wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 6:51 PM, Polytropon wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 12:05:37 -0500, David Jackson wrote:
> > > > Many of your issues are non-issues, as your suggestions were
> > > > implemented in some form long ago. For e
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:04:35 -0500, David Jackson wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 6:51 PM, Polytropon wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 12:05:37 -0500, David Jackson wrote:
> > > > Many of your issues are non-issues, as your suggestions were
> > > > implemented in some form long ago. For example, u
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 6:51 PM, Polytropon wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 12:05:37 -0500, David Jackson wrote:
> > > Many of your issues are non-issues, as your suggestions were
> > > implemented in some form long ago. For example, updated applications
> > > are compiled and available online. You
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 12:05:37 -0500, David Jackson wrote:
> > Many of your issues are non-issues, as your suggestions were
> > implemented in some form long ago. For example, updated applications
> > are compiled and available online. You can use "pkg_add -r" to
> > install the newest binary packag
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 10:28 AM, David Jackson wrote:
> For now I have totally given up on FreeBSD
>
When was this going to occur exactly?
--
Adam Vande More
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/free
On 07/03/2012 18:56, David Jackson wrote:
> You have just now declared complete indifference to and alienated about 99%
> of the potential user base and their needs, those who could care less about
> compiling source and messing with compiler options.
You're forgetting that one size does *not* fit
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 4:27 PM, David Brodbeck wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 10:56 AM, David Jackson
> wrote:
> > You have just now declared complete indifference to and alienated about
> 99%
> > of the potential user base and their needs, those who could care less
> about
> > compiling source
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 12:42:52 -0500, David Jackson wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Polytropon wrote:
>
> > David, allow me to add a few thoughts:
> >
> > On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 11:28:47 -0500, David Jackson wrote:
> > > As for compile options, the solution is simple, compile in all feature
>
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 10:56 AM, David Jackson wrote:
> You have just now declared complete indifference to and alienated about 99%
> of the potential user base and their needs, those who could care less about
> compiling source and messing with compiler options.
Maybe FreeBSD isn't right for the
On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 03:20:19PM -0500, David Jackson wrote:
> I think that your statement here is fundamentally flawed and wrong, because
> you have assumed that it is impossible for the OS to be able to be user
> friendly and geek friendly at the same time. This is wrong. In fact, I have
> outl
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 11:28:47 -0500
David Jackson wrote:
> One faulty argument I heard was that it is often not a good idea to
> upgrade to new software release.
This is an argument that you appear to have completely misunderstood.
The point of suggesting that you use release package is that it's
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Benjamin Tovar wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 12:57:46PM -0500, David Jackson wrote:
> >
> > So it seems like a happy compromise here. You will get what you need
> > and us newbies and other users who really dont want the extra
> > trouble of compiling will get o
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Andrew Gould wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Benjamin Tovar wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 12:57:46PM -0500, David Jackson wrote:
> >>
> >> So it seems like a happy compromise here. You will get what you need
> >> and us newbies and other users who rea
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Benjamin Tovar wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 12:57:46PM -0500, David Jackson wrote:
>>
>> So it seems like a happy compromise here. You will get what you need
>> and us newbies and other users who really dont want the extra
>> trouble of compiling will get our bi
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Andrew Gould wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM, David Jackson
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> This is irrelevant. FreeBSD has these options because most of its
> >> users are system administrators, developers or other types of geeks.
> >> Serving these needs is a ma
On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 12:57:46PM -0500, David Jackson wrote:
>
> So it seems like a happy compromise here. You will get what you need
> and us newbies and other users who really dont want the extra
> trouble of compiling will get our binaries. Everyone gets what they
> want and is happy, it seem
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM, David Jackson wrote:
>
>>
>> This is irrelevant. FreeBSD has these options because most of its
>> users are system administrators, developers or other types of geeks.
>> Serving these needs is a major part of what FreeBSD does. That's why
>> we have the long stan
> This is irrelevant. FreeBSD has these options because most of its
> users are system administrators, developers or other types of geeks.
> Serving these needs is a major part of what FreeBSD does. That's why
> we have the long standing motto: "FreeBSD - The power to serve".
> People who don't w
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:42 AM, David Jackson wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Polytropon wrote:
>
>> David, allow me to add a few thoughts:
>>
>> On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 11:28:47 -0500, David Jackson wrote:
>> > As for compile options, the solution is simple, compile in all feature
>> > opt
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Rob wrote:
> I ran into problems with pkg-upgrade when I upgraded from
> 8.2p6->9.0-RELEASE, and part of the problem ended up being a tool
> pkg_upgrade used (uma). That was the reason portupgrade didn't work as
> well. I ended up hacking the support tool and pk
I ran into problems with pkg-upgrade when I upgraded from
8.2p6->9.0-RELEASE, and part of the problem ended up being a tool
pkg_upgrade used (uma). That was the reason portupgrade didn't work as
well. I ended up hacking the support tool and pkg_upgrade to do what I
needed, but they are both d
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 12:42 PM, David Jackson wrote:
>
>
>
>
>> Especially on systems low on resources, compiling from
>> source is _the_ way to squeeze every required (!) bit
>> of performance out of code. Even if compiling may require
>> some time (due to optimization flags), the result can
>>
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Polytropon wrote:
> David, allow me to add a few thoughts:
>
> On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 11:28:47 -0500, David Jackson wrote:
> > As for compile options, the solution is simple, compile in all feature
> > options and the most commonly used settings into the binary packag
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 10:28 AM, David Jackson wrote:
> I still have yet to find a resolution to the problems I have had with
> binary packages and upgrades on FreeBSD. Binary upgrading is broken with
> every tool I have tried.
>
> There is no real reason why FreeBSD should not provide a facility
> Many of your issues are non-issues, as your suggestions were
> implemented in some form long ago. For example, updated applications
> are compiled and available online. You can use "pkg_add -r" to
> install the newest binary package that is available, or you can update
> your an installed appli
Hmm what is the problem ? Is there a log or something that you can share ?
Usually portsnap, freebsd-update, pkg_add -r or portupgrade that do binary
update should be enough
Regards
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone from Sinyal Bagus XL, Nyambung Teruuusss...!
-Original Message-
From:
David, allow me to add a few thoughts:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 11:28:47 -0500, David Jackson wrote:
> As for compile options, the solution is simple, compile in all feature
> options and the most commonly used settings into the binary packages, for
> the standard i386 CPU.
I think this can develop int
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:50 AM, wrote:
> Hmm what is the problem ? Is there a log or something that you can share ?
> Usually portsnap, freebsd-update, pkg_add -r or portupgrade that do binary
> update should be enough
>
>
Ive tried them all. I will work on getting some logs to post here shortly
30 matches
Mail list logo
