Re: Pacman?

[Gergo Szakal <bastyaelvtars@xxxxxxxxx>]

c6f9baa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>	 <5c3e8b1b0608160658t3345c550j9efe593dbaadb5d2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <8613c4330608160728r64727d23wfbe332e3ebd4a41f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-Reply-To: <8613c4330608160728r64727d23wfbe332e3ebd4a41f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <44e33077$0$777$415eb37d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 160.114.118.67
X-Trace: 1155739768 crater_reader.dragonflybsd.org 777 160.114.118.67
Xref: crater_reader.dragonflybsd.org dragonfly.users:6769

Pieter Dumon wrote:
> 
> With portage, you can choose between being stable or using the latest
> of the latest, with new package versions usually being integrated in
> portage in just a couple of days or less (although being marked
> unstable, that is). But pkgsrc-wip solves this.
> 
> It's more userfriendly with regard to dependencies and updates than
> pkgsrc, but pkgsrc has its advantages, and there's a large amount of
> effort put
> into it to port it to DFly, so I think its better to put effort in
> pkgsrc than in alternatives.

TBH, I don't see why have ports for FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Gentoo and 
whatever, why not make a system that has many packages for many OS's. 
Having used FreeBSD a lot, using OpenBSD and DragonFlyBSD now, I don't 
understand why their package systems have to be separated, especially 
when there is pkgsrc for OpenBSD and FreeBSD either, it should be shared 
among BSD flavors at least (i mean NetBSD, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, 
DragonFlyBSD). Would be also good if it were integrated with Slackware 
better, having it as its primary packaging system instead of the 
multilocular package searching pain that one wanting to install 
something has to face. I don't say it should replace apt/dpkg or rpm but 
it should be paid more attention.

Just my $0.02.