Hopefully that helps answer some of your questions. Overall, I find the FreeBSD ports system to be more flexible, but an acceptable runner-up for purposes of binary package-based OSes in my opinion is Debian.
Just to add my .02$ to this topic, speaking from a perspective of a FreeBSD lover in a company which prefers Debian, I must say that, even though I administer a couple of FreeBSD boxes, I sometimes envy my fellow Debian admins who manage tens of Debian boxes with a really quick apt-get upgrade (or whatever the command) to fix a hole or apply a patch vs. updating the source tree and making world on FreeBSD (not to mention mergemaster which is a nightmare and the build process which lasts for hours if not days). I'm quite frightened by the effort I would have to invest to get the same effect administering a large number of FreeBSD boxes. Mind you, I'm not actually talking about the ports tree; given one of the portupgrade/portmanager/portmaster tools, I usually find my way through upgrading ports via source to be rather simple. On the other hand, on Debian there is a price for simplicity, stable still ships with really old 3rd party apps like Mysql 4.0, Apache 1.3, PHP 4.3... To conclude my rantings, I really appreciate the effort behind binary updates and freebsd-update project. Colin is doing a great job and by using portsnap and/or freebsd-update, FreeBSD is slowly overcoming the complicated upgrade process which combined with good ports tree and above mentioned portupgrading toolset and portaudit makes for an outstanding OS. Regards, -- Nino _______________________________________________ firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"