Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
One way is to put your local changes into files/patch-aa [1] using
diff format. Other times it's as simple as defining some environment
variables by passing them into make, via /etc/make.conf, etc.
But what happens to the file files/patch-aa after I do
Kai Grossjohann wrote:
Charles Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Oh, yes. The first time you run into a problem and fix it yourself,
or make a change to the programs to add some feature that you want,
you will discover the serious advantages.
However, if you never try to fix bugs or write code for
Charles Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Oh, yes. The first time you run into a problem and fix it yourself,
or make a change to the programs to add some feature that you want,
you will discover the serious advantages.
However, if you never try to fix bugs or write code for yourself, then
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
Before I answer to this question, I cannot help noting that you don't
*HAVE* to compile everything from source. In fact, if you install a
RELEASE version of FreeBSD and use pkg_add to install the binary,
precompiled packages of just the applications you are going to
On 2004-06-19 10:58, Patrick Useldinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
Before I answer to this question, I cannot help noting that you don't
*HAVE* to compile everything from source. In fact, if you install a
RELEASE version of FreeBSD and use pkg_add to install the
Patrick Useldinger writes:
True for the CDs. But once you want to upgrade, things get more
complicated. For example, I did not find a package for OpenOffice
1.1.1 in the offical places, although OO is certainly an
excellent candidate for a package.
If you have not found in
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
Indeed, packages-4-stable, packages-4.10-release on ftp.freebsd.org
don't include openoffice. A search at google though yields:
http://projects.imp.ch/openoffice/
which does list FreeBSD packages of OO-1.0.3 and OO-1.1.0 :-)
Which is not 1.1.1 or the latest 1.1.2.
On 2004-06-19 17:59, Patrick Useldinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
Is it possible to satisfy all the users with precompiled packages?
No.
My argument is the other way round: build a package will *all* available
options. It will be bloated, but still smaller (in
On the other hand, the OpenBSD-people advise using packages instead of
ports. See http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq8.html#PortsvsPkgs
I guess it's just a matter of personal taste and needs.
GH
On Sat, Jun 19, 2004 at 05:11:22PM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On 2004-06-19 10:58, Patrick
Hi all,
I must say that I was initially interested in the idea of building
software from source - but I am kind of loosing it.
Certainly, it allows you to compile with the compiler options you want,
you are able to optimize the binaries for your CPU, but: does it really
matter? Are the speed
Hi all,
I must say that I was initially interested in the idea of building
software from source - but I am kind of loosing it.
Certainly, it allows you to compile with the compiler options you want,
you are able to optimize the binaries for your CPU, but: does it really
matter? Are the speed
in message [EMAIL PROTECTED],
wrote Patrick Useldinger thusly...
(Building from source) allows you to compile with the compiler
options you want, you are able to optimize the binaries for your
CPU, but: does it really matter? Are the speed improvements really
visible?
I haven't run any
On 2004-06-18 20:38, Patrick Useldinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, my question is basically: did you, in your experience, find that
compiling from source *really* has any serious advantages that make up
for the time it takes?
Before I answer to this question, I cannot help noting that you
Parv [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
in message [EMAIL PROTECTED],
wrote Patrick Useldinger thusly...
(Building from source) allows you to compile with the compiler
options you want, you are able to optimize the binaries for your
CPU, but: does it really matter? Are the speed improvements
On Jun 18, 2004, at 2:29 PM, Patrick Useldinger wrote:
Certainly, it allows you to compile with the compiler options you
want, you are able to optimize the binaries for your CPU, but: does it
really matter? Are the speed improvements really visible?
Tweaking the compiler flags and targetting
Optimization and speed are indeed an arguable advantage of compiling
from source, but another GREAT advantage is the possibility of setting
compile-time options and dependencies. I.e. lots of packages have
options which can be enabled/disabled only at compile time. For
example whether you want
Hi,
When I was using 4.1 release, removing just the hardware that I was not
using and building the Kernel gave me mutch better performance.
I Dont know about internals so, probabily, this is not true anymore.
Anyway, I could mount a DNS Server on a Pentium 75 Mhz with 16MB,
because
17 matches
Mail list logo
