Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

FreeBSD Ports for GNU/Linux

michael posted more than 12 years ago | from the thirty-two-tetris-variants-and-counting dept.

Linux 294

proclus writes: "GNU-Darwin has provided a special FreeBSD ports tarball (20 Mb) for GNU/Linux users. We have modified the FreeBSD Ports System to bring thousands of free software offerings within the reach of every GNU/Linux user. The system is not fully automated yet, but you can untar it in your home directory and try it. Just follow these directions. This system provides full access to the FreeBSD ports, so that users can compile and install software in their home directories. Root access is not required."

cancel ×

294 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

fuh. . . (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2330985)

kya!!

wtf (-1)

mackga (990) | more than 12 years ago | (#2330986)

Whores!

You suck Mackga (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331163)

Your pitiful attempt at first posting has failed and I bet you're not as drunk as I am.

In short, Mackga, you suck!

IMPORTANT NEWS (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331181)

People of Slashdot, do not be fooled. It is important that you know that mackga [goatse.cx] is a sand nigger. Thank you for your attention.

Re:wtf (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331196)

You see me now a veteran of a thousand trolling wars
I've been living on the edge so long
Where the winds of limbo roar
And I'm young enough to look at
And far too old to see
All the scars are on the inside
I'm not sure if there's anything left of me

Don't let these shakes go on
It's time we had a break from it
It's time we had some karma
We've been living in the flames
We've been eating up our brains
You ask me why I'm weary, why I can't speak to you

You blame me for my obnoxious trolls
Say it's time I changed and grew
But the war's still going on Taco
And there's no end that I know
And I can't say if we're ever...
I can't say if we're ever gonna to be free

Breaking news (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331220)

Mackga, a 40-year-old Romanian man, was arrested in October 1995 for "attempting to seduce another man". In June 1996, he was convicted and sentenced under Article 200 of the Romanian Penal Code to three years' imprisonment.

Mackga: "I was treated very badly by the prison guards, because in Romania there is no approval for those who have had relations between the same sex," he said. "And worse, the guards... beat me and insulted me. Criminals are better regarded than a relationship between two men. So because of this homosexual or lesbian thing, I was treated like the lowest of the low."

Amnesty International is appealing to the Romanian Senate to adopt legislation recently drafted by the government that would repeal Article 200. You can join us in this effort!

Everybody: join "Bash Mackga" thread! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331241)

The little shite deserves all the bashing he gets!

Re:wtf (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331249)

Dood. I hear you will send port ot people if they ask. Could you send me some porn? Just email it to call_apple@hotmail.com. thanks, man!

Mackga is a faggot (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331259)

Yeah, he'll send you porn.

Too bad it's disgusting gay porn.

Re:wtf (-1)

cyborg_monkey (150790) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331254)

d00d! I am not a whore!

Re:wtf (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331271)

Yes you are!

You're mackga's little bitch.

Just get it over with (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2330991)

Install FreeBSD if that's what you want.

Forget GNU. Forget Linux. Forget BSD. Forget Microsoft.

Just use the system that best fits your needs. This may mean that your pet OS is not a universal fit for someone else.

Franklin said it best! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2330993)

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.

FP, baby (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2330994)

I've successfully downloaded every damn ROM off of mame.dk using my l33t script. Over 3000 games, baby.

I'm so l33t it's incredible.

Dude! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331028)

Hey, could you send me that script? I've been trying to get something like that to work, but for some reason I just can't do it (guess I'm not 1337).

Could you send the script to astroman1492@yahoo.com, please?

FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (2)

garcia (6573) | more than 12 years ago | (#2330999)

I thought that most programs (that are of any use) would compile over on FreeBSD would also compile on Linux and vise versa. Doesn't FreeBSD have the ability to run Linux programs w/the same sort of thing?

What programs would I seriously want to run that are of FreeBSD fame only? None that I know of.

What do I know though?

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (2)

kilgore_47 (262118) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331008)

Maybe you don't know about them because you aren't a bsd user.
I'm not a bsd user myself, and I'm curious to see what thas to offer (when I get home from work ;-)

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (1)

weav (158099) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331020)

Seems to me the important thing about the "Ports" system is that it automatically fetches the system and all its dependencies and compiles them in one go.

THe most annoying thing about dealing with RPMs is that I don't find out until "rpm -i" time that it needs 6 other RPMs.

Thanks to the Port porters...

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (2)

garcia (6573) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331033)

ahhh, even when I ran RH I rarely used RPM unless I was just so lazy I didn't feel like compiling (usually for large libraries, etc)

I just don't see the point to this. 20mb seems like a lot of space to waste to run applications that should be ported to both OSs anyway.

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (1, Informative)

The_Rift (257762) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331034)

It's the system of installing the software not the software itself.
Installing a program using the ports tree is as simple as:
#cd /usr/ports/foo/bar
#make install clean

The source is downloaded from one of a list of servers and so are any dependancies. Everything gets compiled and installed and the source code and whatnot is cleaned up afterwards.
It's one of the biggest reasons I love FreeBSD so much.

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (2)

garcia (6573) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331059)

I have Debian.

apt-get update
apt-get upgrade

no wasted time compiling, knows the dependencies I need, and it does everything for me.

that's just my opinion though.

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (1)

mvc (38569) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331144)

I'm a Debian user too, and I dearly love apt-get, but I must say, I've often wished for something like FreeBSD's ports system for the times when I need to compile something myself. I know about--and use--apt-get source, but it's not aware of dependencies (FreeBSD ports is, as I recall), it's harder to do customized configurations (thought I suspect this is a result of my own stupidity), and it won't install packages into your home directory.

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (2)

iso (87585) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331147)

I've recently started using OpenBSD and I had heard how ports and packages were functionally equivalent to Debian's apt-get (with which I am most familiar). I was very disappointed to find out that while packages and ports are nice, they're nowhere near as nice as apt-get.

First of all with ports, you have to compile everything yourself, which can take a lot of time on slower machines (like my home router/firewall). In the end it just creates an OpenBSD package anyway.

So I tried packages. They're pre-compiled, like debs, but the pkg_add software is terrible! In order to update a package you have to first remove the package then add it again! And if the package has dependancies you have to remove all the dependancies and re-install them all again! Plus you can't just do a "pkg_add foo," you have to do a "pkg_add ftp://ftp.openbsd.org{blabalbla}/foo-3.17-2.pkg," which means you not only have to know where to get the file, you also have to know the version number and all other information in the filename in advance! Add to this the fact that there's no real comparable substitue to "apt-get update;apt-get upgrade," and it's quite obvious that OpenBSD's packaging system is woefully inadequate.

I'm not sure if FreeBSD's paackaging system is better, but I was shocked to see just how bad OpenBSD's packaging was. It's too bad, because apart from the packaging management, I love OpenBSD. Perhaps I'll start working "apt-get-izing" OpenBSD. Has anybody else started such a project? It seems badly needed.

- j

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (0)

The_Rift (257762) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331166)

Binaries are bigger, and some licences don't allow for binary distribution.

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (0)

The_Rift (257762) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331152)

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't apt-get use binaries? The ports tree also make provisions for upgrading and various options can bet set by editing the make file.
I haven't used apt-get, but I've heard it comapared to the ports tree regualarly.

Compile flags (3, Informative)

flynn_nrg (266463) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331161)

I prefer to compile with these options in my /etc/make.conf

CPUTYPE=i686

This way you automagically have a cc -O -pipe -march=pentiumpro setup so you don't compile for 10 years old 386 cpus.

Sure, compiling KDE2 will take some time, but who cares, you can continue working while the package builds, thanks God for dual cpus and SCSI disks :)

Re:Compile flags (0)

The_Rift (257762) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331183)

Thanks for that! Gonna tweak my config now!

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (1)

psavo (162634) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331208)

> I have Debian.

>apt-get update
>apt-get upgrade

>no wasted time compiling, knows the dependencies I need, and it does everything for me.



So do I. The ONLY thing I think apt-get misses is capability to selectively recompile programs for YOUR architecture.
Debian (I think) is still compiled for 386. Now if you have Athlon 20THz, you miss all the MMX, MMX+, SSE, SSE2, 3DNow!, and all ather nice things.
Probably your only thing that's compiled for your precious proc. is your kernel. How about glibc, XFree86 and all the other fon things?
Now THAT'd give you some more edge...

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (3, Informative)

lemox (126382) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331246)

While it doesn't do dependancies like ports, the following will do what you want:

# apt-get install pentium-builder
# less /usr/share/doc/pentium-builder/README.Debian

apt-get source whatever -b

pentium-builder is pretty handy IMHO.

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331256)

Baah like a sheep, k.

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (1)

xonker (29382) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331037)

The cool thing may not be the software available through ports, but the way that software is distributed for BSD. Their ports system seems to be a pretty neat way of distributing software. I'm mostly a Linux user, but also have several BSD boxen at home. They both have their advantages. It's nice (from my point of view) to see any cross-pollination between the two groups.

It's all Free UNIX, it's all good. At least that's how I look at it.

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (2)

ichimunki (194887) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331046)

How is the ports system an improvement over Debian's apt-get system?

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331060)

It isn't associated with the FSF.

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331114)

and that would be good because ???

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331189)

The FSF stands for enslavement, quite contrary to its name. Freedom isn't created through restrictive licensing.

Closed source licensing, against which the FSF rails, is very restrictive because the user doesn't get the right to use the licensed software as he sees fit. GPL licensing restricts the user from developing so licensed software as he sees fit.

It's just restrictive at another level than fully closed licenses. But make no mistake, it too is fully closed too.

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (2)

Arker (91948) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331110)

How is the ports system an improvement over Debian's apt-get system?

Last I checked, apt-get was great for binary installs, but not so well suited to local compilation. Ports is the equivelant for people that prefer their binaries locally compiled and optimised for their system.

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (2)

Glytch (4881) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331218)

Sounds like an ideal system to add to Slackware.

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (2)

zulux (112259) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331127)

The ports collection would come in usefull if apt-get or rpm somehow didn't work properly for you. The ports system seems very robust on my FreeBSD box - it takes a long time to compile some of the larger programs, but after coming back after a long cofee break, I've never encountered a problem. It would be a great backup to have around just in case.

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (5, Insightful)

FreeUser (11483) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331142)

How is the ports system an improvement over Debian's apt-get system?

First, I am a real fan of Debian, apt-get, and am running debian both at work and at home. .deb's and apt-get are IMHO as good as it gets when distributing, managing, and upgrading binary packages.

What the FreeBSD ports system does which is so cool is get rid of the idea of distributing binaries at all. Instead, you go into the subdirectory corresponding to the program you want and type "make install." Based on the skeleton files present the program source(s) and any patches are downloaded, applied, the program is then compiled against whatever libraries you have on your system (no more "this binary requires glibc version Y but you only have X"), and installs the compiled binary. Furthermore, doing so is as easy as installing a .deb or .rpm, meaning relatively inexperienced users can do this. Dependencies are simpler (you only need what is required to compile the program, and such dependencies are also automatically downloaded and compiled at the same time. You do not need particular software versions based on what the binary was compiled against.)

Basically, it combines "apt-get source --compile; dpkg -i [new-packages].deb" into "make install," and simplifies the package management/dependency management.

BSD ports is IMHO the only software management system that in some ways exceeds even debian's approach, but keep in mind there are conceptual differences to the approach (all things source vs. precompiled binaries), so it isn't entirely an apples to apples comparison.

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (2, Interesting)

ethereal (13958) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331258)

So, I'm curious - what happens when you upgrade one of your big system libraries this way? Does the ports system automatically recompile any affected apps, or re-fetch them, or what? Not that I'm saying Debian necessarily handles this any better (I wouldn't know). Heck, at least with a packaging system, you know what the dependencies are for various apps. If everything's built from source, do you even know which apps were built against which library versions?

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331274)

You need quite a computing power and good network connections to use the ports systems on a desktop ona daily basis. I've used all three BSD-s and they completely suck dick compared to Debian as far as package management is concerned. Now if only Debian had binary deltas instead of downloading whole packages...mmmmm

For all practical purposes BSD is dead.

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (1)

Maditude (473526) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331039)

What programs would I seriously want to run that are of FreeBSD fame only? None that I know of.
Good point, but I think the point of this exercise was that FreeBSD ports are a handy utility for installing software packages from source, handling all sorts of crazy dependencies for you automagically. The only things I'm not crazy about are: the port-maintainers sometimes pick some pretty weird locations to store things, and: things can get pretty confusing when you upgrade.

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331083)

the software you get is the same. the difference with *bsd ports is in the way the software source/binaries are retrieved, built and installed. among other things it means not manually hunting for a suitable mirrors for the software, and then its dependencies. in my limited experience it works really well.

Re:FreeBSD programs w/in reach of Linux users? (1)

Z4rd0Z (211373) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331085)


What do I know though?

Not very much, about this subject. The ports collection is not software for FreeBSD only. It's a packaging system that takes care of dependencies, in some ways similar to Debian's dpkg.

Who gives a shit? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331001)

When some piece of shit little software comes out for Linux, everyone here goes crazy. But when Microsoft releases another Earth-shattering new technology that will make our lives so much easier, everyone starts bashing them. I guess you all have just gotten used to seeing quality stuff from Microsoft, and since Linux shit is always going to suck, you've just accepted that fact and will appreciate whatever little shit you whores can get.

BSD is dead (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331004)

Yeah yeah, we all know.

What is GNU/Linux? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331006)

Is it like Linux?

Re:What is GNU/Linux? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331016)

It is like Linux, but it sucks even more because it has the GNU on it. Just use Microsoft/Windows you fucking faggots!

Re:What is GNU/Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331077)

What does GNU stand for? I have heard that it is some kind of gay slang. Is that true?

Re:What is GNU/Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331260)

GNU = the Gay Narcissists Union

Re:What is GNU/Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331021)

Yes, except it's Free, whereas Linux is proprietaty.

Re:What is GNU/Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331062)

Where can I get GNU/Linux? Redhat only sells Linux.

Re:What is GNU/Linux? (1)

sup4hleet (444456) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331102)

Nah GNU/Linux is more like Unix(tm)
:)

Re:What is GNU/Linux? (2)

garcia (6573) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331123)

I am sick and tired of the GNU/Linux / Linux arguement.

Call it whatever you want, just don't call it Microsoft/Linux. ;-)

Re:What is GNU/Linux? (1)

glan (152153) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331287)

Richard Stallman pointed ou that since Linus Torvalds used some GNU programs in developing his OS this could be acknowledged by calling the new OS GNU/Linux. Nothing wrong with that!

GNU/Linux (5, Funny)

DrXym (126579) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331011)

Note to BSD folks: It's Linux, not GNU/Linux.

Re:GNU/Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331018)

Now it's BSD/Linux!

Re:GNU/Linux (1)

mr_don't (311416) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331070)

Actually,

"Linux" is the name of a kernel, the core and basic input/output mechanism of an operating system, while the term "GNU" refers to the entire operating system as a whole. GNU attempts to be available for other kernels, such as the HURD, and some GNU programs can be used on top of, for example, Windows or other sorta-posix compliant systems such as BeOS. Most people who use the Linux kernel are running a huge suite of programs provided by the developers working both alone and in conjunction with the Free Software Foundation.

I wonder what the goal is of dening the Free Software Foundation credit for things such as the GPL and kicking off gcc, etc.?

Re:GNU/Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331086)

You're right. I'll now commence calling my systems SAP/AS400 from now on.

Veering slightly OT - the goal (1)

Arker (91948) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331153)

I wonder what the goal is of dening the Free Software Foundation credit for things such as the GPL and kicking off gcc, etc.?

It's usually motivated by personal hatred for RMS it seems. The guy has strong ideals and has refused to compromise them. In a world where corruption and compromise is the norm, this naturally pisses a lot of people off. Even people that rely on software that exists because of his refusal to compromise. Those are the ones that are most virulently opposed to giving him any credit at all, naturally.

Re:Veering slightly OT - the curbside cowboys (1)

richie2000 (159732) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331211)

Or should we rename it RMS/Linux?

I understand RMS' point here, but a Linux distro is much more than just Linus' kernel and a bunch of GNU stuff on top. It seems unfair to single out GNU/FSF/RMS when KDE, Gnome, XFree, MySQL, sendmail.org/Eric Allman, the ReiserFS, Emacs and LVM people and loads of others are just as well-deserved of a honourable mention. GNU doth not a distro make. If RMS keeps this up, some anal types will start compiling alternates for all the GNU utils... How's that for poetic justice?

Just give it up - GNU's not Linux.

Re:GNU/Linux (3, Insightful)

Reality Master 101 (179095) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331155)

I will never, ever call Linux by that name. If I ever meet RMS, I won't use the term, either. He can correct me over and over (as he is notorious for doing), and I will never, ever EVER EVER use that idiotic term.

My goal is to not cave in to the "language police". The GNU component is only one component of a Linux distribution. The Kernel is called Linux. A distribution is typically called Linux. I am not confused by this. Most people are not confused by this.

I wonder what the goal is of dening the Free Software Foundation credit for things such as the GPL and kicking off gcc, etc.?

I wonder what RMS's goal is for denying other parties credit for things such as XFree86, Perl, etc. GNU's stuff is only piece. Certainly an important piece, but only one piece.

It is RMS/Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331172)

You know that deep down, that is what he wants it called.

Re:GNU/Linux (1)

Bob The Cowboy (308954) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331158)

Why?

So if I only install BSD utils/libs am I then running BSD/Linux?

What if I pick and choose... or install both? Am I then running GNU/BSD/Linux? At what point does this retardation end?

Bill

Re:GNU/Linux (2)

JohnG (93975) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331188)

Don't FreeBSD and MacOS X also use gcc and other GNU software? Why aren't we forced to call them GNU/FreeBSD and GNU/MacOS X?

Re:GNU/Linux (2)

DrXym (126579) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331237)

GNU refers to the OS as a whole????


I hate to state the bleeding obvious but major and significant parts of a typical Linux distribution are not GNU. Try to guess which bits. I consider it an insult that the term is blanketed over code (including some of my own) which is neither owned by the FSF nor even GPL in many cases. Certainly the FSF provides some of the bedrock tools for a Linux distro - and we salute them for it - but to name the whole distro in their honour is just silly.


Linux is a perfectly acceptable term to refer to the whole OS in generic terms or to the kernel. If specific context is needed, prepend Mandrake, Redhat, SuSE etc. as appropriate.

Re:GNU/Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331130)

Where did you get your info? Linux is just one small little file... then everything around (just about) is from GNU... that is your redhat, debian, etc. all use the same crap around the linux kernal.

(note the use of crap is not saying anything about gnu nor linux in general... its just saying the stuff around it)

Re:GNU/Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331149)

Thanks, DrXym. Or is that Asshole/DrXym?

Re:GNU/Linux (1)

poot_rootbeer (188613) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331160)


Interesting statement, Dr. Xym. "It's not GNU/Linux", indeed.

Oh I get it! "XYM" is just "RMS" ROT13'd. What a clever jape!

Welcome to WWIII (-1)

ascii spork (518057) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331014)


,;;;,
;;;;;;; FROM THESE FOOTPRINTS I CAN DETERMINE
.-'`\ '/_ THAT BIN LADEN IS A FAG WE SHOULD NUKE
.' \ ("`(_)
/ `-,.'\ \_/
\ \/\ `--`
\ \ \
/ /| |
/_/ |_|
( _\ ( _\ #:## #:## #:## #:##
#:## #:## #:##

ascii spork

Re:Welcome to WWIII (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331082)

good to see ascii spork back in action!

RPM for the people? (1)

richie2000 (159732) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331024)

(make install of the whole thing)
That would typically take at least a week and over 20gig total, but it is worthwhile to do.

A week? Well, maybe it's time for that vacation...

Re:RPM for the people? (1)

steveo777 (183629) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331057)

Or 200+ years on a 56K modem. Ugh... living in the sticks (or somewhere past them) realy does suck for geeks.

Re:RPM for the people? (1)

steveo777 (183629) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331120)

Okay, before I get flamed for such a wierd number, I didn't even think about doing the math for this. Let's see then. 20*1024*1024/60/60/24/3 =~ 81 days. Close enough...

Re:RPM for the people? (1)

richie2000 (159732) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331159)

I once gave a lecture on modem standards, bandwidth and transmission speeds. I used a leeched copy of MS Office 97 as my yardstick - on a 14.4 modem it would take x days to download while with a 56K you'd be up and violating the EULA within hours. :-)

BTW, I assumed the author meant it would take a week to compile (he probably didn't do the math either - it's scary if he did) and use up 20 gigs of diskspace, but I'm not sure.

Oh well (1)

absurd_spork (454513) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331026)

I already hear them screaming, "That's like stealing precious BSD software for Linux!"


But then, the FreeBSD port/package system is still the best one I've ever had the pleasure to work with, especially because of its good source/binary interoperability.

Re:Oh well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331044)

Don't you get it? BSD people *want* people to do this kind of stuff. BSD folks want people to be able to use their work on other platforms.

BSD is FREEDOM. It's the GPL folks who are crying that everyone's trying to usurp their freedoms at every turn. Meanwhile, the BSD people are happily donating code all over the place.

You would think being (FSF) Free would make you happy. It seems it just makes you grouchy.

Re:Oh well (1)

Kwikymart (90332) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331216)

I already hear them screaming, "That's like stealing precious BSD software for Linux!"

The only main problem with that statement of yours is that you are stupid. The only way you can "steal" BSDL code is to remove the copyright notice from either the source or not include it in the binary distribution. Even then it is not considered "stealing". Just look up the definition of "steal" in the dictionary before you post stuff like this. Its more commonly Linux people talking about "Microsoft stealing FreeBSD code". So please, until you know what you are talking about do not spread this kind of FUD around.

Open Packages (2, Informative)

Z4rd0Z (211373) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331027)

I don't know how many times I wanted to do this, but always got bogged down in the details. The OpenPackages [openpackages.org] project has had their system working on Linux for a while now. However, OpenPackages departs from the FreeBSD ports collection and takes a lot from OpenBSD and NetBSD as well. And it's not finished yet. Work seems to have slowed down on it too, unfortunately.

Re:Open Packages (1)

kilgore_47 (262118) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331081)

In the beginner's mind there are many possibilities. In the expert's mind there are few. --Suzuki-roshi

So being certain and closed mined makes one an expert? I don't like that quote at all!
Maybe it should read In the young mind there are many possibilities. In the elderly mind there are few.

(yes I know replying to sigs is passe and even modbait, but I just couldn't resist. At least I'm not using my +1 bonus!)

Re:Open Packages (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331118)

The quote never says to be closed minded is to be an expert. It says to be an expert is to have fewer possibilities in one's mind. That isn't the same thing. Also, don't take it too literally.

Re:Open Packages (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331192)

thanks for the clarification, Suzuki-roshi.

Linux Portage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331042)

If you want a better designed port system for linux try Http://www.gentoo.org. Gentoo Linux rocks!!

Quick! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331043)

Quick! Someone nab the code, and port BSD to windows!

Then sell it as proprietary software!

Oh no ! (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331050)

BSD is undead !
Get off Linux you ugly zombies !

So (-1)

SpanishInquisition (127269) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331051)

Can we install the BSD Linux emulator under Linux, that would be the most imaginative waste of system ressources since Windows ME.

hunh? (0, Offtopic)

Guns n' Roses Troll (207208) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331053)

testing, ignore this shit

Slashdot requires you to wait 20 seconds between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment.

It's been 10 seconds since you hit 'reply'!

If you this error seems to be incorrect, please provide the following in your report to Source Forge:

Browser type
User ID/Nickname or AC
What steps caused this error
Whether or not you know your ISP to be using a proxy or some sort of service that gives you an IP that others are using simultaneously.
How many posts to this form you successfully submitted during the day* Please choose 'formkeys' for the category!
Thank you.

Re:hunh? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331113)

Congratulations, you've learned to copy and paste! Big shiny medal to you!

Sounds nice to me (1)

famazza (398147) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331055)

To tell the truth I've never used *BSD ports. I hear a lot that they are wonderful. I don't know how it works, but I'm sure that I'll try it.

The only thing I hope is that they let every choices to me. I use slackware and tarballs for one reason: the word automatic have been sounding weird for me.

Since I got tired of Mandrake and rpm automatic for me means this:

  • In a way somebody though it was better, not necessarily the way I need or want.

Hope not to find this kind of automation with ports.

Why not use the real thing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2331058)

If you want FreeBSD ports, user FreeBSD. DUH :)

Ports++ = Gentoo (1)

polarbear (611) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331064)

Anyone remotely interested in this should be checking out a fairly new distribution called Gentoo which is working towards their 1.0 release. You can build your entire system just by booting from a cd image, formatting, untaring a small build image, setting up network, and installing everything from their advanced ports like system called "portage". Its basically ports++ that forms the core of the distro (aka its not just for "third party packages").

It supports stuff like profiles, etc so by editing a few text files you can define your which specific packages and versions should be installed, etc (basically define your own distro ;) Plus Gentoo is currently in the progress of testing its new dependency based init script system (no sysvinit or bsd init scripts here) and working on some other cool ideas.

Definatly check them out, there is no other distribution or OS quite like it! :)

BTW, the url is http://www.gentoo.org

Re:Ports++ = Gentoo (1)

Z4rd0Z (211373) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331148)

Yeah, I've tried it and it definitely has potential. Once they're a little more mature, I'll probably trade Debian for it.

Re:Ports++ = Gentoo (2)

flynn_nrg (266463) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331199)

"Its basically ports++ that forms the core of the distro (aka its not just for "third party packages")."

Please, read the FreeBSD handbook :)

cd /usr/src && make -j8 buildworld

I installed FreeBSD 4.3 on my box when it was released, I CVSuped the latest source code last week and now my box reads:

ainhoa# uname -srn

FreeBSD ainhoa.energyhq.org 4.4-STABLE

Yep, FreeBSD is cool :)

Can someone explain why I would want this? (2)

mj6798 (514047) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331106)

Both on RedHat and on Debian, installing software either from source or from binary is trivial. And almost all the software I have ever wanted has been packaged for Linux distributions. Why would I want the BSD ports? Is there any software that I don't know about that I am missing?

gentoo linux (1)

snorks (103191) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331141)

gentoo linux [gentoo.org] has a similar system called portage. You can download a 40M bootstrap iso and build your entire system using portage. This is a wonderful distro.

It's about time.... (1)

zentex (176409) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331190)

hopefully now all them Linux users will see what kinda nifty toys us BSD users have been using since the invention of the toaster...

...and then (oops, here comes the conspiracy theory) after said Linux users like the ports system, they will stop using Linux and start using BSD...(yea yea, shuddup, it's humor).

*yaay*

Porting ports.. (2)

RenQuanta (3274) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331204)

I'm an avid FreeBSD user, so I am really glad to see FBSD technology making its way into the Linux camp. I hope many Linux newbies benefit from this. I believe it or not, I found FBSD easier than Linux when I knew nothing about UNIX. The Ports Tree was a huge part of that.

But let me see if I've got this right...the FreeBSD ports tree is a port of Linux/nonBSD-UNIX based software (mostly Linux based) to FreeBSD, and now someone has taken it and ported it back to Linux...heh.

(Okay, okay, I realize it's the actual ports tree system which is being ported, but still... ;)

Its all about the Debians (3, Interesting)

On Lawn (1073) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331215)


Well, how is this better than Rock [rocklinux.org] Linux?

Rock's package management system is source based, and updates, etc...

And as for elitism, I spoke with the creater on the phone a few years ago when he was starting it, and he's a really jolly bloke.

GNU Darwin != GNU / Linux (1)

spring (116537) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331231)

Am I missing something? GNU / Darwin is the base OS in Apple's MacOS X; it is not linux.

http://www.gentoo.org (1)

BenLutgens (56508) | more than 12 years ago | (#2331252)

This distro has a ports like system natively. But rather than being based on make which wasn't designed for "package managment" it's a set of scripts and applications designed for the purpose. It allows you to install, uninstall and package pieces of software in a sane manner and handles dependancies and virtual dependancies as well.

In fact the lates rc has a new dependancy based init as well. And it's always loaded with the latest apps and libraries.

I was a long time debian weenie untill I found gentoo. Now there's no turning back.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>