On Mon, 2017-10-02 at 12:26 +0300, abi wrote: > 02.10.2017 12:07, Carmel NY пишет: > > While it will undoubtedly work, it is still more complex than the > > average > > desktop user requirers. > > Building from ports is already more complex thing than one could > expect > from desktop user. I don't think ports are recommended way to keep > system updated. It you use ports, you change port options (why would > you > use them if not), so you are on narrower path - non-default options > are > not QA tested, can conflict with each other and within dependency > chain, etc > > Synth fits the bill nicely by being, for the most > > part, easy to understand and run. I am already on my forth "ports > > maintenance" > > program having used portmanager, portmaster, portupgrade and now > > synth. At > > this point, I would almost rather switch to a new OS before > > abandoning synth > > for something that IMHO is just overkill for the average user. > > You know, this is open source, right? You may pick up ADA stack, > I'm > sure J Marino will give you some ideas how to overcome ino64 issue. >
Here is Marino's post on the FreeBSD forum about ino64 issue: https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/62633/ _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
