Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 14th Feb 2006 22:25 UTC
PC-BSD "After using PC-BSD several days, I was impressed with how easy it is to use. It's a good desktop OS, and a great way to introduce BSD to new users. The 1.0 release has a few rough edges, but nothing that should scare off prospective users. For the future, I'd like to see something like Synaptic to manage PBI packages and allow users to browse for software without having to visit the PC-BSD Web site, and it would be nice if the site had a little more documentation, but I expect such things will come along in due time as the project matures."
Permalink for comment 96074
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Pc-BSD or FreeBSD?
by molnarcs on Thu 16th Feb 2006 00:34 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Pc-BSD or FreeBSD?"
molnarcs
Member since:
2005-09-10

FreeBSD ports miss information about versions (package abc requires def >=2.5). So, either you recompile all dependencies,..

No, not really - there are some occasions when you have to update related ports, but these are the exceptions, always notified in /usr/ports/UPDATING. So, for instance, there is an update to mysql. You compiled amarok with mysql support - which means, amarok now depends on mysql. When you portupgrade -a - which updates mysql to the newest version - you don't have to recompile amarok. Also, if you take a look at the Makefiles, most ports depend on the presence of specific libraries, not package version. Everything is handled automatically by portugprade/install tools - you don't have to skip anything, or have additional recompiles: most of the times (there are exceptions as I noted) when you update, you only update those packs that have newer version available in the ports tree. I might have misunderstood your post however, so please clarify if I missed your point.

Ports is a single version - supporting at least 4 branches of FreeBSD (4.x, 5.x, 6.x, 7-CURRENT) - I think that this is not a problem, in fact, it is a small miracle I believe ;) Ports are also very stable compared to ebuilds (except stable branch, which is slightly more outdated than ports). Yes, there are always broken ports (but currently, www.freshports.org doesn't differenciate between broken on $arch or $version - but they are working on it, so half of the ports marked as broken will probably work for you, because they might be broken on Fbsd 4.x, or on the Alpha, or any combinations).

Reply Parent Score: 2