Gentoo/FreeBSD is a Unix-like operating system developed by Gentoo Linux developers in order to bring Gentoo Linux design principles such as Portage to the FreeBSD operating system. Gentoo/FreeBSD is part of the larger Gentoo/BSD project. Read the interview here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
The Gentoo INIT is actually symlinked as opposed to what another poster said but not in any way like other distros. It is not a mess. All the INIT scripts reside in /etc/init.d/ and all their confs reside in /etc/conf.d/. All the scripts have dependencies built in so you never have to manually assign INIT scripts to any order at all. The only symlinking that is done is for the different runlevels, namely boot and defualt. They are located at /etc/runlevels/boot and /etc/runlevels/default. The INIT scripts are symlinked from /etc/init.d/.
That is indeed a mess.
As for portage, calling it a buggy clone is a huge injustice. It is not a clone at all.
Gentoo's founder boasts that he ripped off ports for portage on Gentoo's homepage.
USE flags alone make it worth it to me. Who wants to configure a package everytime you install?
FreeBSD's ports system has had such flags for years -- long before portage was even a gleam in Dan Robbins' eye. The problem with port's flags is that they aren't enforced to the level that they are in portage. That is, one package maintainer decides to use "WITHOUT_X = yes" whereas another uses "WITH_X = no", which leads to users listing dozens of redundant flags in the system-wide make.conf. If the Gentoo/FreeBSD team really wanted to make things better, they'd devote their resources to promoting the standardization of these flags in FreeBSD and across the open-source world.
Member since:2005-10-02
Gentoo's founder boasts that he ripped off ports for portage on Gentoo's homepage.
That's not true. What he does state, is that he was inspired by his experiences with ports. Therefore he created a solution for Gentoo which had some of the same functionality, but working better (according to his needs). So it's not a clone. It's a different solution to some of the same problems.
Member since:2005-06-30
The Gentoo INIT is actually symlinked as opposed to what another poster said but not in any way like other distros. It is not a mess. All the INIT scripts reside in /etc/init.d/ and all their confs reside in /etc/conf.d/. All the scripts have dependencies built in so you never have to manually assign INIT scripts to any order at all. The only symlinking that is done is for the different runlevels, namely boot and defualt. They are located at /etc/runlevels/boot and /etc/runlevels/default. The INIT scripts are symlinked from /etc/init.d/.
That is indeed a mess.
I beg to differ. The symlinks are only used by the system so facilitate parsing with simple tools that just run all symlinks in a directory. Simple tools that are not only fast, but do one thing well.
As long as people use rc-update --- Gentoo's init manager --- to configure stuff, its not a mess, and distro mantainers can push big changes and not break compatability (They can just modify rc-update to respect/migrate the old format)
Well, if it works fine, why is it even considered a mess?
Member since:2005-07-07
That is indeed a mess.
Care to explain why or do you just want to make unsubstantiated claims for no reason other than to stoke the fire?
Gentoo's founder boasts that he ripped off ports for portage on Gentoo's homepage.
He does no such thing. Daniel Robbins explains that he liked ports and decideded to implement something like it. He did but it operates very differently than any of the BSDs.
FreeBSD's ports system has had such flags for years -- long before portage was even a gleam in Dan Robbins' eye. The problem with port's flags is that they aren't enforced to the level that they are in portage. That is, one package maintainer decides to use "WITHOUT_X = yes" whereas another uses "WITH_X = no", which leads to users listing dozens of redundant flags in the system-wide make.conf. If the Gentoo/FreeBSD team really wanted to make things better, they'd devote their resources to promoting the standardization of these flags in FreeBSD and across the open-source world.
I wouldn't compare the two systems at all. USE flags on Gentoo are much more robust and flexible than BSD. Gentoo's USE flags are very simple yet fine-grained. Does anyone actually use the mess that BSD's make.conf is or do they configure at time of compile?
Member since:2006-04-13
Maybe befaore talking about the port system you should learn to read the documentation, as this is explained in a number of articles on the net (if you're not able to understand the official documentation correctly).
In FreeBSD nobody uses make.conf for ports, but pkgtools.conf, this means something like:
MAKE_ARGS = {
'multimedia/mplayer-*' => 'WITH_GUI=1 WITH_FREETYPE=1',
}
this means that you can configure make args on a per port basis.
make.conf is used for core options, so kernel and core subsystems.
Everything else is the same old Linux hype: a few ignorant informations make a brand new system "more robust and flexible" than one that's been available and in production 'till 1998.
Regarding the other consideration on make flags I couldn't agree more, but it's not Gentoo or FreeBSD fault, developers should use the same flag for the same option.
Member since:2005-07-07
this means that you can configure make args on a per port basis.
make.conf is used for core options, so kernel and core subsystems.
Everything else is the same old Linux hype: a few ignorant informations make a brand new system "more robust and flexible" than one that's been available and in production 'till 1998.
Tell me how that is simpler than Gentoo? It's not. Tell me how it is more flexible when it is not. Gentoo is obviously more flexible because their USE system is much more organized and universal. Maybe you should learn how portage works before making such claims. Gentoo's USE system is much more robust. Portage is an integrated part of the operting system, ports is not. That means you have access to USE flags in many different ways. You can rebuild all packages that changed USE flags. You can see what flags have been changed everytime you emerge an application. You can query what USE flags were used to build an application. There are many more examples like this. ports is just a build system. Portage is an integrated part of the operating system.
Member since:
2005-07-07
What's the point of this again? Yes, I read the linked interview, but I don't see how replacing FreeBSD's clean textfile init with Gentoo's symlinked mess helps matters. Replacing ports with the extremely buggy clone that is portage doesn't seem to do anything productive, either.
Then again, the interviewee admits that he's a Gentoo fanatic who only began using FreeBSD to destroy it. No surprise there.
I know this has been replied to already but your post is so misleading I had to reply. The Gentoo INIT is actually symlinked as opposed to what another poster said but not in any way like other distros. It is not a mess. All the INIT scripts reside in /etc/init.d/ and all their confs reside in /etc/conf.d/. All the scripts have dependencies built in so you never have to manually assign INIT scripts to any order at all. The only symlinking that is done is for the different runlevels, namely boot and defualt. They are located at /etc/runlevels/boot and /etc/runlevels/default. The INIT scripts are symlinked from /etc/init.d/. This system basically allows you to add and remove using rc-update without having to figure anything more out other than whether you want it to be a boot service or a default service.
As for portage, calling it a buggy clone is a huge injustice. It is not a clone at all. Portage is very different than ports and I would hardly call it buggy. I've had very little issues with portage itself and I've been on Gentoo for 3 years. It is also a much more capable and configurable package manager than ports. USE flags alone make it worth it to me. Who wants to configure a package everytime you install?