Linked by Corey Holcomb-Hockin on Wed 5th Nov 2003 19:48 UTC
FreeBSD I've been using computers since I was quite young and have been using Unixlike OSes for about two years. Most of my life I've used Macs and only started using Windows and Unixlike OSes recently for programming. I'm good at learning OSes as long as they are documented. I've been using FreeBSD for about a year and a half.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by dpi on Thu 6th Nov 2003 03:15 UTC

Both Debian and Portage exist for FreeBSD, too.

What i'd like on a firewall is a simple method to become remotely ''secure'' via CLI. It should require only 1 or 2 commands and should be possibly automated. Patching a source is a horror, it should be an option for me, not required. Debian GNU/Linux allows me this, but i hate IPTables so much as i love PF that i wouldn't chose for Debian GNU/Linux. Since PF runs on {Open|Free|Net}BSD i'm considering any of these 3 which allows me to use Debian and PF. I think it'll become Debian GNU/NetBSD.

"By inconsistent I mean Linux distributions in general (not the kernel itself, but the various distributions as a whole OS). There is no clear standard that distributions maker follow, eg locations of programs change (sometimes /usr, sometimes /usr/local, etc.)."

How about i give you a shell account on my Debian GNU/Linux box and you show me which .deb's have been installed in /usr/local? Answer: none.

Only the 3rd party software compiled myself is installed in /usr/local but ./configure --prefix=/usr would have fixed this; i don't want it to be in /usr because when i'd like to do a reinstall i can see in /usr/local which 3rd party apps i installed.

Besides, does it matter much when all you need to do is run a binary? It's in $PATH, you know. Can you give me an example with a GNU/Linux distribution and this problem?