On Sunday, June 02, 2013 14:32:44 John Marino 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.
Yes. IIRR the kde4 metapackage and some big chunks of KDE are missing from the current repo in 64-bit, but available in 32-bit. I think it was a license not allowed on the package building box. In some past quarters, the 32-bit packages (I didn't have a 64-bit machine) weren't built at all. On Sunday, June 02, 2013 11:42:54 Justin Sherrill wrote: > 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. pkg-rolling_replace requires several restarts. It's better to build all the binary packages on an empty system, then use pkgin to replace them. Pierre -- li ze te'a ci vu'u ci bi'e te'a mu du li ci su'i ze te'a mu bi'e vu'u ci