Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 10th Apr 2009 15:43 UTC, submitted by Alexander Yerenkow
PC-BSD PC-BSD, the desktop-oriented FreeBSD variant, has released version 7.1, dubbed Galileo. In case you don't know, PC-BSD is a FreeBSD distribution with lots of customisations focussed on the desktop user. Its most defining features is the Push Button Installer, a self-contained package format with handy installers/uninstallers. PC-BSD 7.1 comes loaded with changes and updates.
Thread beginning with comment 358057
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by Stephen!
by DrillSgt on Fri 10th Apr 2009 18:43 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Stephen!"
DrillSgt
Member since:
2005-12-02

What is so great about PBI's?
In Arch Linux, for example, if I want something I just type:
pacman -S something
What is so difficult about that, except that it's less similar to the way Windows and MacOS do it?

(I'm not trying to bash here, I really don't understand it, please explain...)


Not taken as bashing. I know you can type those commands, and installing the software is easy. The difference in using a PBI is there are no dependencies to worry about, everything is in the package. You also don't have to install as root, as everything can be installed in the home directory. Yes, that can be done on Linux if comiling from source, but when using the repos you need to hope that all the repos are up and running. With a PBI, once you get it, you can install it while disconnected from the net, as there is nothing else to get and no dependencies to download.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: Comment by Stephen!
by righard on Fri 10th Apr 2009 18:47 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Stephen!"
righard Member since:
2007-12-26

Well okay, it does sound like a rather good system. Though I still prefer good old pacman.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[5]: Comment by Stephen!
by sj87 on Mon 13th Apr 2009 08:09 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Stephen!"
sj87 Member since:
2007-12-16

Well okay, it does sound like a rather good system. Though I still prefer good old pacman.


I do too, but I'm afraid all those people, who find constant "MD5sum invalid - package corrupt - update failed" messages annoying, might see it different.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by Stephen!
by WereCatf on Fri 10th Apr 2009 21:44 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Stephen!"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Not taken as bashing. I know you can type those commands, and installing the software is easy. The difference in using a PBI is there are no dependencies to worry about, everything is in the package. You also don't have to install as root, as everything can be installed in the home directory. Yes, that can be done on Linux if comiling from source, but when using the repos you need to hope that all the repos are up and running. With a PBI, once you get it, you can install it while disconnected from the net, as there is nothing else to get and no dependencies to download.

As said, the downside to PBI is that the dependencies are taking extra space. But I didn't notice any mention of another, bigger, issue; the dependencies included could be out-of-date and as such may contain security holes. I personally don't like either of those things.

It'd be wonderful if you could combine those things: the application would be downloadable with all of its dependencies included, but those would only be installed and used if those weren't already provided by the system. That'd remove the duplicate dependencies AND allow the system to manage security fixes and updates to libraries while still allowing you to install the app even without internet connection.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[5]: Comment by Stephen!
by DrillSgt on Fri 10th Apr 2009 22:44 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Stephen!"
DrillSgt Member since:
2005-12-02

As said, the downside to PBI is that the dependencies are taking extra space. But I didn't notice any mention of another, bigger, issue; the dependencies included could be out-of-date and as such may contain security holes. I personally don't like either of those things.

It'd be wonderful if you could combine those things: the application would be downloadable with all of its dependencies included, but those would only be installed and used if those weren't already provided by the system. That'd remove the duplicate dependencies AND allow the system to manage security fixes and updates to libraries while still allowing you to install the app even without internet connection.


I agree completely. You just hit the best case scenario ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by Stephen!
by Luminair on Sat 11th Apr 2009 08:23 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Stephen!"
Luminair Member since:
2007-03-30

the other side of that argument is how you can only guarantee a certain quality with the components you tested with, so mixing and matching components can cause problems

Reply Parent Score: 2