Re: NetBSD vs FreeBSD

[Alex Goncharov <alex-goncharov%comcast.net@localhost>]

,--- You/Aleksej (Thu, 04 Aug 2011 12:33:41 +0400) ----*
|
| > | they depend on files instead.
| >
| > See above.
| 
| What is it in makefiles?

Can't understand your question.
 
| > So, on FreeBSD
| >
| >    make -C editors/emacs LOCALBASE=/usr/pkg-2011Q2 install
| >
| > would probably work.  I guess.
| 
| Do you mean that I am to pass all those settings along?
| Am I to implement some dispatching in mk.conf?
| 
| Will those packages check /usr/local when building? What if they do?
| (I remember programs that used to check and maybe still check for
| libraries in /usr/local when building on FreeBSD.) This may surprise
| you not in an unpleasant way some day.
| 
| > Won't try due to the lack of a need.
| 
| That's what I mean when I tell of simplistic usage patterns.

Contrary to most other posts in this thread, I find this one (yours,
that is) written from the perspective, "Never surrender".  pkgsrc may
have some advantage over the port system, as outlined in this message:

,--- Alistair Crooks (Thu, 4 Aug 2011 06:29:49 +0200) ----*
|
| my main gripe, as a user, was the absence of audit-packages, and the
| need to specify either the precise version number of a package, or
| remember to wildcard things, when using the pkg_install tools, with
| possibly interesting effects if dealing with something like libtool-\*
| and libtool-base-\*
|
`---------------------------------------------------------*

but:

  a. Nothing prevents you from using it on FreeBSD (AFAIU).

  b. You haven't demonstrated, with an example (I could run it for you
     on a FreeBSD, if it's brief enough) any functional deficiency of
     a FreeBSD port system.

I realize that you don't have a reason to do "b", just pointing that
fact out.

-- Alex -- alex-goncharov%comcast.net@localhost --