Re: freebsd-texlive port
This is not constructive criticism, but just to give voice to how great it would be if texlive could become an official port of freebsd, integrated into the ports system!!! On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Jamie Paul Griffin ja...@kode5.net wrote: [ Polytropon wrote on Wed 10.Oct'12 at 17:49:25 +0200 ] On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 14:01:44 +0100, Jamie Paul Griffin wrote: If you prefer, you can just use the download dvd or netinstall from the texlive website. They have provided binaries for FreeBSD. I installed the full TeX distribution myself just the other week on FreeBSD 9. So no need to use the ports system if you don't want. The only remaining problem will be dependencies within the port management system, e. g. ports requiring a TeX distribution which defaults to teTeX... By the way, would it be possible or desired to introduce a setting to /etc/make.conf regarding _which_ TeX distribution to use, e. g. WITH_TEX=texlive (will install TeXlive) or WITH_TEX=teTeX (will install teTeX) if a dependency of TeX is requested? That's a very good point. I recall installing something from ports the other day that needed the binary mktexlsr, and I pointed it at my texlive installation by adding the $PATH to root's shell file, but it didn't work out. I had to let it install the tetex port for it to work. I don't mind having more than one TeX distribution on the system but tetex is just so outdated, it would be nice if ports could be set up in a way that they can use texlive if the user has it installed, either from the ports collection itself or from the main texlive site as I have. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- joe gain jacob-burckhardt-str. 16 78464 konstanz germany +49 (0)7531 60389 (...otherwise in ???) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Clang
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 7:45 PM, Stas Verberkt lego...@legolasweb.nl wrote: Mark Felder schreef op 21-06-2012 19:28: On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:16:31 -0500, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote: programs compiled by GPLv3 compiler are not encumbered. This has not been decided in court yet. Additionally, the exceptions for using the GCC runtime library for non-GPL executables is limited to what hey call eligible compilation processes, what rules out using proprietary GCC plugins or other combinations of core GCC functionality with non-GPL tooling and extensions. Please note that this is indeed not tested in court. Therefore, reality may turn out even more interesting. That's why a lawyer's answer should always be it depends. :) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org So, has anyone compared the performance of clang vs gcc compiled in daily use-- for example as a server? Anyone can cherry pick a couple of binaries, but how important is this for the performance of FreeBSD world? -- joe gain jacob-burckhardt-str. 16 78464 konstanz germany +49 (0)7531 60389 (...otherwise in ???) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: CLANG vs GCC tests of fortran/f2c program
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 7:18 AM, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote: Yes, Clang in general produces slower binaries than gcc. Is that in dispute or something? Or is this just repetition in case we didn't hear you the first time? just yesterday i've heard lots of otherwise claim. Try thinking of the transition as a step back to take many steps forward. What exactly step forward it means? For now i see ONLY politics and aggression after pointing out facts. This doesn't look like serious behaviour of serious people. I think that this is a more complicated decision than just choosing the 'fastest' compiler. There are many other variables involved, and of course the decision has a political dimension. Most things do. Diversity and competition are nice attributes to have in a system. Having alternatives allows users choose a compiler based on what criteria they think are important. Users also benefit from the experience, but more importantly, for such non-trivial projects as LLVM, different designs are interesting in themselves. I personally, am looking forward to seeing what the lldb debugger can do. Historically, some of the most important software projects have been themselves disasters, but they've lead people to change the way they think about a problem and lead to later better solutions-- for example MULTICS ;) This is part of the development process. And this can't just happen in a laboratory. LLVM needs projects like FreeBSD to test it and simply be involved. I notice that bitrig, which recently forked from OpenBSD, and which want to be a more progressive operating system will also be swapping to LLVM and Clang. We don't know what possible benefits there will be from the LLVM project. But there will be some. I was a bit frustrated about being stuck with gcc4.2 for a while, and was trying to compile as many ports as possible using gcc4.6 (FreeBSD 8.2). There seemed to be some improvement in performance, but now I don't bother, world is compiled with Clang and the ports are compiled with gcc4.2 and everything works (most of the time.) I'm satisfied with performance. I don't really understand your concerns. I mean unless you're a fairly radical environmentalist and are really concerned about saving every clock-cycle, running a bit slower really isn't that much of a problem most of the time. Or just change your compiler. Will i be able to compile FreeBSD base system with gcc after some time? not sure. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- joe gain jacob-burckhardt-str. 16 78464 konstanz germany +49 (0)7531 60389 (...otherwise in ???) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Clang?
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Robert Huff roberth...@rcn.com wrote: Thomas Mueller writes: Now how will I know whether GCC or Clang is the default compiler for building the world and kernel, and for ports? My understanding is: 8.* base - gcc ports - gcc 9.0 (and possibly 9.*) base - gcc ports - clang (with the caveat some ports need either any gcc or a specific version) I can't confirm this other than to say, that I compile stable 9 base (kernel + world) using clang and ports using gcc. I have to compile base using WERROR= and NO_WERROR= settings in make.conf so that the compilation doesn't halt on error messages. Maybe this is no longer required. This is as per wiki, though admittedly, as per wiki a couple of months ago. I can imagine that the problem will be compiling ports with clang. Some of the gcc code is not correct as per specification. There's a list somewhere of currently compilable ports using clang. CURRENT base - as of this writing, clang (look for announcement in current@ or hackers@) ports - clang, as above though with a shorter list (Someone please correct me if they have more accurate information.) Robert Huff ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- joe gain jacob-burckhardt-str. 16 78464 konstanz germany +49 (0)7531 60389 (...otherwise in ???) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Clang
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Mark Felder f...@feld.me wrote: Please stop asking for instant gratification; you won't have it no matter how loud you yell. The Clang decision is far-reaching and gives numerous advantages to the FreeBSD platform. It's also not been a waste of time; you're implying that the FreeBSD devs have spent thousands of hours hacking away at Clang which is far away from the fact. We're simply building upon their work, testing Clang on the codebase (and finding bugs GCC was hiding!!), and reporting any issues upstream which get fixed very very quickly. If you want to recompile everything with lang/gcc (4.6.3) and the latest binutils go right ahead, but don't expect support when things go horribly pear-shaped. Clang is a great set of compiler tools. If you are only a user, as you suggest, than you shouldn't be compiling anything, just running binaries. If you are using a compiler, than you may not be a developer, but you aren't just a user. In any case, if you're not developing, like me, you don't really get a say-- well, you do, but probably nobody is listening. http://www.drdobbs.com/cpp/240001128 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- joe gain jacob-burckhardt-str. 16 78464 konstanz germany +49 (0)7531 60389 (...otherwise in ???) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Clang
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote: Please stop asking for instant gratification; you won't have it no matter how loud you yell. gratification Seems like you ask for it. This might be to gratuitous for most on the list, but diversity is almost reason enough. And I don't mean this is some sort of fashion-way. I think llvm and clang are interesting and serious projects. Actually, to be honest, c programming with clang is really nice, it gives me really nice error messages, which makes debugging easier. I like it for that too. From a practical point of view, the only negative thing about using clang is that some applications which have been written using gcc won't compile using it, but gcc is also ok. I'm not that interested in saving a few minutes compile time, or bytes of memory. The Clang decision is far-reaching and gives numerous advantages to the FreeBSD platform. for example what? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- joe gain jacob-burckhardt-str. 16 78464 konstanz germany +49 (0)7531 60389 (...otherwise in ???) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Clang
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 9:11 PM, 文鳥 bunc...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 19:05:59 +0100 Matthew Seaman matt...@freebsd.org wrote: On 06/06/2012 18:28, Thomas D. Dean wrote: Has the discussion on why change to clang been made available? You might be interested in this video: http://www.llvm.org/devmtg/2011-11/videos/Davis_LLVMinFreeBSD-mobile.mp4 Yes, endlessly. Mostly on lists like freebsd-hackers@... and at various conferences and developer summits. Check the list archives. I would like to know the reasoning. It's simple. gcc-4.2, which is what the base system compiler is derived from is: * fairly old * doesn't perform as well as more recent compilers * doesn't adhere to recently established standards There's another good reason for clang which nobody mentioned so far: clear diagnostics. If you ever had to wade through gcc's debug output and compare several thousand character long template instantiations, just to find where they differ and then see the clear problem descriptions that clang produces instead, you'll understand what I mean. And in combination with libc++, which just arrived on stable, I am finally able to use all the features of C++11 that I want. Try to use e.g. std::regex even on g++47, and just see what happens. Of course, getting rid of GPL is an added benefit ;) After reading all those complaints, I just had to respond and thank everyone involved very much for importing clang and libc++. Great job well done! Best regards, 文鳥 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- joe gain jacob-burckhardt-str. 16 78464 konstanz germany +49 (0)7531 60389 (...otherwise in ???) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why am I, Still subscribed and reading this list ?
...@freebsd.org freebsd...@freebsd.org freebsd-apa...@freebsd.org freebsd-...@freebsd.org freebsd-...@freebsd.org freebsd-driv...@freebsd.org freebsd-virtualizat...@freebsd.org freebsd-sysinst...@freebsd.org freebsd-toolch...@freebsd.org freebsd-off...@freebsd.org freebsd-desk...@freebsd.org Thank you very much . Mehmet Erol Sanliturk ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- joe gain jacob-burckhardt-str. 16 78464 konstanz germany +49 (0)7531 60389 (...otherwise in ???) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: starting xfce4 reboots machine
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Waitman Gobble gobble...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Waitman Gobble gobble...@gmail.comwrote: On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Waitman Gobble gobble...@gmail.comwrote: On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 7:42 AM, Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com wrote: On Sun, 27 May 2012, Waitman Gobble wrote: Hi, I've been running FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT for some months, last time i rebuilt the system was April 20th. I've rebooted my machine many times and started X and Xfce4 without any trouble, however today I'm out of town on the road and when I startx my machine reboots. If I log in as root and startx i can run xorg without xfce4. but if i try startxfce4 the machine reboots. If I try to startx without xfce4 from my non-root account it locks up. It's pretty quick and nothing I can see in the logs... Anyone have any ideas about troubleshooting??? It seems like it's out of the blue with no changes to the system that I recall. :) First, make sure you have cairo-1.10 instead of 1.12. After that, run pkg_libchk from sysutils/bsdadminscripts. Rebuild anything that says it is missing libxfce4-utils. After that, well, I still see some unsteadiness from xfce-4.10. There's a long delay on start, like a DNS timeout (but I have working DNS). Switching to console works, switching back usually does not, rebooting the machine. Leaving X and starting again reboots the machine. These last two could be due to the recent X upgrade, except I'm pretty sure they did not happen until xfce-4.10. thanks. i'll check it out.. Waitman spending some time troubleshooting this. it's a weird harold, the machine runs fine for days doing various things (but if i want X i have to log in as root first and startx, otherwise instant reboot). I've noticed that if i do a pkg_add the thing reboots, if i run SciTe editor it reboots. like snap of a finger instantly. I can do pkg_delete, i deleted cairo (but it claimed to be 1.10). i'll have to re-add somehow, might have to build from source if it won't stop rebooting :) i'll try the pkg_libchk Thanks, Waitman this is kind of strange, ls -l /usr/local/lib | grep cairo - what's up with the zero-byte files.. i did do a pkg_delete but didn't expect to see this. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org Can't help with a solution. I had a very similar problem. I'm following 9.0-STABLE (rev. 235976 ca. week old) using xfce and have a thinkpad laptop with intel on-board graphics chip. My problems started when I updated the cairo port, and at the time I couldn't really believe that cairo was the cause of _the_ problem, because of the way X was crashing. What was even more frustrating was that the Xorg log file was not revealing anything other than unknown error and segfault. So, I didn't know what to do for a while, and after spending a couple of days looking for an answer, downgrading cairo fixed that issue. Couple of days later the new xfce is also available, and I have had no problems running it, on stable with downgraded (currently current again*) cairo. Be sure to read UPDATING with respect to xfce4-utils etc. It would be interesting to hear from someone who knows what's going on as this is the first major hiccup that I've had using freebsd. Thanks, Joe * http://www.freshports.org/commit.php?category=graphicsport=cairofiles=yesmessage_id=201205260354.q4q3sboi042...@repoman.freebsd.org -- joe gain jacob-burckhardt-str. 16 78464 konstanz germany +49 (0)7531 60389 (...otherwise in ???) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: no X after updating ports [Intel i945GME]
Hi all, same problem here as well. Apparently this is in relation to updating Cairo. See the thread on the forum: http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?p=178116 = downgrade Cairo to 1.10 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/graphics/cairo/distinfo Would be good to see this fixed ;) On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Ramiro Caso ramirocas...@yahoo.com.ar wrote: On 21/05/2012 23:23, Antonio Olivares wrote: Dear folks, I have an acer-aspire 1 netbook running FreeBSD 9.0 i386. It was working beautifully, but after todays updates, X no longer works. I have a similar problem. I have a Dell Inspiron 1318 running 9.0 amd. I use KDE4 (kde-4.7.4_1). After an upgrade of ports (using portupgrade), X works, but every time I launch a non-KDE application, X crashes. Putting vesa instead of intel in xorg.conf stopped the crashes. I upgraded roughly the same ports, and I get a Segmentation fault: 11 at address 0x10 error. The card is an Intel Mobile GM965/GL960 IGC. If it helps, I can provide more details (upgraded ports, log files and screen output). On screen I have drm0:Intel i945GME on vgapci0 info: [drm] AGP at 0x2000 256MB info: [drm] Initialized i915 1.6.0 20080730 I have also: xfsettingsd: Fatal IO error 35 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0. xfce4-settings-helper: Fatal IO error 35 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0. xfwm4: Fatal IO error 35 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0. Thunar: Fatal IO error 35 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0. wrapper: Fatal IO error 35 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0. xfce4-panel: Fatal IO error 35 (Resource temporarily unavailable) on X server :0. gkrellm: Fatal IO error 0 (No error: 0) on X server :0. running 'ssh-agent -s -k' unset SSH_AUTH_SOCK; unset SSH_AGENT_PID; echo Agent pid 1785 killed; xinit connection to X server lost waiting for X server to shut down xfdesktop: Fatal IO error 2 (No such file or directory) on X server :0.0. Segmentation fault: 11 at address 0x10 Fatal server errror: Caught signal 11 (Segmentation fault: 11). Server aborting updates installed via portmaster: fontconfig-2.9.0,1 gdk-pixbuf-2.23.5_2 gtk-2.24.6_1 also cairo went from cairo-1.10.2_3,1 to cairo-1.12.2,1 Any advice, comments or suggestions are greatly appreciated. Best Regards, Antonio ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- joe gain jacob-burckhardt-str. 16 78464 konstanz germany +49 (0)7531 60389 (...otherwise in ???) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: FreeBSD Kernel Internals Documentation
of terms but
not the other? It is either right or it is wrong. You cannot be
slightly pregnant. I personally find such terms morally repugnant;
however, since they are commonly used on this forum it appears that they
are socially acceptable. Would you not concur or are you going to try
and bullshit your way out of this one?
You so clearly define what is the basic problem with FreeBSD in
general. The sour grapes attitude is so clearly self evident. You
would rather spend your time defending something that doesn't work
as fully functional as it could be if the developers stopped patting
themselves on the back for accomplishing what other OSs had already
done 3 or more years earlier and rather attempted to bring the OS on
par with those competing OSs.
What do you define with your hanging around sniping at people and
sabotaging discussions attitude? In the years I have been on this
list, it seems like you have demonstrated a rabid hatred of all
things related to FreeBSD and most things related to open source
software in general, which makes me wonder why you hang around this
mailing list.
I have a morbid hatred of those who suffer from decidophobia. However,
after restudying the matter, I think it more likely that the real
problem is an irrational fear of success. If only Microsoft was able to
accomplish things like easily getting a printer fully functional under
its environment, making sound or video or wireless cards work without
in all too many cases resorting to draconian measures, and the list
goes on, I would agree with you. However, we (and by we I am assuming
that you haven't got your head buried so far up your ass that you are
not aware of what is transpiring on other Operating Systems) are both
aware that, that is not the case. Linux in general and Ubuntu in
particular have made huge strides in making computers easier to use and
opening up the path for better, easier and more advanced software to be
installed.
There is a commonly held truism, If you are not the lead dog of the
pack, the view never changes. Now if you are happy playing follow the
leader and watch their balls dangle in your face, then fine.
Personally, I want to be in the lead. As soon as anyone steps up and
remarks about FreeBSD's standing in the desktop market, they are
immediately met with the Blame the {fill in the blank} choir. I am
now officially renaming that the Sour Grapes Posse.
--
Jerry ♔
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
__
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
--
joe gain
jacob-burckhardt-str. 16
78464 konstanz
germany
+49 (0)7531 60389
(...otherwise in ???)
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: FreeBSD Kernel Internals Documentation
Writers who rely on ideological positions such as (socialism || fascism || jedi-knight == good | bad) really need to go visit a social science mailing list. It's not like political/ religious mailing lists don't exist. My positivist take on things: 1. Nobody is stopping anybody from changing their freebsd kernel. The same cannot be said of MS Windows. Documentation is an excuse. 2. FreeBsd is a main-stream O/S-- just look at the number of different architectures/applications which are supported by FreeBSD. 3. FreeBSD isn't even hard to use, if you only want to use it like 80% of computer users, to run your web browser, watch videos and listen to music. People who consider it difficult might like to remember their first experiences with learning windows. 4. Drivers aren't really a limitation. Look at the history of computing, that modern O/S support such diverse platforms is an amazing development. As far as I'm concerned, FreeBSD supports main stream components, there are no classes of components that I'm aware of which aren't supported by FreeBSD. If you need to use a particular device, for which there is no driver, historically it's not unusual to find that on any particular platform a particular device is not supported. 5. Nobody is making anyone use FreeBSD. It's free. If you don't enjoy it, don't use it. Maybe remove yourself from the mailing list-- or don't, if you just want to stay informed. Normative takes: 6. Is FreeBSD better than windows? For me it is. For me it's stabler. What I remember from using windows, and what I'm aware of, from people around me who use windows is that over time, the system seems to degrade. This leads to really major actions such as re-installation every 6mths or so. And... 7. The temptation to install illegal software on MS Windows is very high. Who wants to pay for every little gimmicky app? Who can afford to pay for some major applications, which are needed for studying etc.? This often leads to an unstable system and security problems. The ports system in comparison is a much preferred software/ application distribution system because at least you get to look at the source code, if you want to. 8. It's an individual choice. Depends what you use your computer for. maths/R is one of my favorite applications and it even runs on windows. May the force be with you! On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Robert Bonomi bon...@mail.r-bonomi.comwrote: David Jackson djackson...@gmail.com wrte: Robert Bonomi bon...@mail.r-bonomi.comwrote: David Jackson djackson...@gmail.com wrte: ... However, My finding is that due to poor documentation, ... [ sneck remaineder of ill-informed trolling ] Start with The Design and Implementation of the BSD 4.4.4 Operating System by McKusick, eal. Then read The design and Implementation of the FreeBSD Operating System, by McKusick and Neville-Neal.` *You* are free to contribute 'better documentation' as you review any particular file. Since you feel it is important, you are strongly encouraged to do something to actually 'make it better', as opposed to merely sitting on the sidelines and sniping at the work of others. Well, okay, yes, I have heard of these books. Ah, you've heard of them. And, you obviously haven't bothered to read them, right? Do you know _who_ McKusick is? Or Bostic? Or the other authors of the first book I referenced? Do you have any idea why it might be a good idea to start with what they've written? Do you know that manpages exist for a lot of kernel-mode functions? Do you understand that with all that *external* documentation, there is little need to replicate it inside the source files? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- joe gain jacob-burckhardt-str. 16 78464 konstanz germany +49 (0)7531 60389 (...otherwise in ???) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: The ports are really funcional?
I agree, the ports are *amazing*. Even when installing a major component like kde4. If you have your base system set up correctly this very complex task will generally complete flawlessly. For a first-time install you can accept most of the default options when configuring, but it's probably not a good idea to just blindly accept every default. Experiment with the different port management software until you find something which you like. Read the documentation about dealing with common issues, making backups, saving compiler/ installation errors, etc. If you are having many problems with ports which require few dependencies, you may have a non-ports related issue of some kind. My entire system is ports based and I belong more to the user than the hacker class. Good luck! On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 4:05 AM, Polytropon free...@edvax.de wrote: On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 22:36:44 -0400, Alejandro Imass wrote: For very large packages such as the graphics system, open or libre office etc. it's much better to use binary versions via pkg_add. It's a waste of time to compile these very large suites and most of the time you will get the config options wrong, and they take forever to compile. Exceptions: 1) You need language-specific settings. Example: OpenOffice in German. 2) You need others than the default options, e. g. if you want to include or exclude some stuff. Example: OpenOffice without KDE. 3) You need options to be set at compile time that do differ from the default options from which the binary packages are made, or because of artificially shit in your pants legal requirements and restrictions. Example: mplayer with mencoder and all (!) codecs 4) You need to speed up things to make them run on older hardware, and you fight for every optimization. Example: mplayer's RUNTIME_CPU_DETECTION. But this is, I think, a case for 1% of users only. You hardly need to do that. In most cases, the default options are fine, and the binary packages just work. For things you want to tailor and optimize to your needs then use the ports system. FBSD is so cool that it doesn't matter if you install one way or the other and you can use almost all methods interchangeably. A managament tool (such as portmaster or portupgrade) helps to keep an eye on dependencies when using the many possible ways. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- joe gain jacob-burckhardt-str. 16 78464 konstanz germany +49 (0)7531 60389 (...otherwise in ???) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
