On Sun, Jun 02, 2013 at 11:42:54AM -0400, Justin Sherrill wrote: > On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 8:32 AM, John Marino <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The bigger question, of course, is *why* pkgsrc users are likely to build > > from source? Could it be that they had lots of issues with that in the > > past? Who wouldn't want something fast and quick if it were trustworthy? > > The "indication" alone is telling. > > I'm the fool that was building the pkgsrc binaries, and _I_ was > recommending that people use pkg-rolling_replace - it led to the least > amount of surprise for people. We have never had a good, > always-up-to-date collection of binaries for pkgsrc, and there's a > number of reasons: the person building them (me) wasn't the person > fixing them, the person fixing them would burn out from the work, the > build cycle took weeks when it worked, the build cycle would take even > longer when it didn't work, pkgsrc traditionally was a from-source > system, I am an idiot, etc.
Let's not forget pkgsrc has no modern binary package manager comparable to pkg(8)* and still uses the traditional pkg_install etc... commands. pkg_radd is a hack, a nice hack but it can't update an existing package collection. -- Francois Tigeot
