Slashdot Mirror
FreeBSD Passes 9000 Ports
Dan writes "Kris Kennaway believes that the french/med port has the honour of being the 9000'th in the FreeBSD ports collection. Congratulations to everyone who has helped to make the Ports Collection such a success over the past 9 years!"
Based on the lack of activity in this forum, I think that it is safe to say that BSD users have been driven out by the trolls.... or they are just too busy downloading all those ports to actually come and post here. ;-)
- It's anarchy baby. Suck it up.
Naa, we've already updated our Ports for this morning. Both Source & Programs.
We are at work currentley making money, we don't have the luxory of summer vacation like the linux'ers.
Different reasons:
- linux has a much larger developer/user base + gentoo is incredibly hyped
- a lot of software is written for linux, sometimes it requires patches to make it work on BSD
- 0-5000 is easier than 5000-10000, just try to find 10000 applications worth porting...
- gentoo portage started on a moment that much more *nix software existed than when FreeBSD ports started
And from what I've seen of portage, I have a strong impression that it's not always that well tested...
[ BSDhead #1 ]: Did you hear? FreeBSD has 9000 ports now!
[ BSDhead #2 ]: Crap! It is too popular! It has hit the mainstream!
[ BSDhead #1 ]: That's what I was thinking - lets switch to OpenBSD
I want to get things working right so that I can release a Port version of Heartbeat but currently I cannot. Luckily it, by design, builds on FreeBSD and puts things into /usr/local/.../ and not /usr/... like on Linux.
This may be a factor why things aren't quite right (different versions of Automake/Conf/lib) .
UPS Sucks
Learn how to read, dumbass.
No, what he's saying is that when freeBSD started (Man... I don't even know how long ago), there was less software to put into the port tree, so hitting that "5000+" mark in a year was nearly impossible.
Not Free(as in beer). Free(as in "I'm free to beat you over the head for being a dumbass")
I've been a FreeBSD fan for several years now. Had I been smarter when I was younger, I would have been a fan even longer than that :)
FreeBSD, IMHO, comes pretty darned close to Linux in terms of ease of install and, in many ways, exceeds it in ease of use. Configuration files are where you expect them to be. Utilities are named what you expect them to be named.
And, to tie into this article, the ports collection provides a wealth of great software. There's no issue as to which flavor of Linux you have... if you're running FreeBSD, the port will generally work on your system, whether you compile it from sources or download the precompiled package from one of the ftp mirrors.
Kudos to the FreeBSD team for all their hard work and for giving us such a stable, reliable, useful platform to develop and play on.
9000 ports in 9 years is like 2.7 ports a day. That's pretty impressive.
(not to equate quantity with quality, but still...)
congrats!
:-)
I've learned to appreciate both the version stability and back-patching done by Red Hat, and the wonderful selection of customizable ports offered by FreeBSD.
However since Red Hat seems to be abandoning the small end of the market, little by little, I find myself recommending and using FreeBSD for most folks, unless they need to admin themselves (red hat is a little easier for those folks).
Now somebody please just get a port for Berkeley's new XML database in there, and we'll be set!
thats, ..
port #1: port 22 ssh
port #2: port 21 ftp
port #1: port 80 http
uh
I'm a linux user that has recently given freebsd a try. I must say that I prefer it over linux. The only thing keeping me from switching full time is the lack of support for the triflex ide controller in my laptop (armada 7400). Linux just got it in 2.4.21 (maybe before in some patch somewhere).
If anyone knows of a driver in development any help would be greatly appreciated.
Jared
FreeBSD is dead, long live FreeBSD!!!! I've been using FreeBSD as my desktop for the last few years. It hasn't always been easy but it has been enjoyable. Since I started as a FreeBSD user the system has just got better and better. Big thanks to everybody involved in making this milestone possible. Here's looking forwards to the 10,000th port!!1
ported to 9000 CPU architectures ;-)
I better get started!
/usr/ports && make install clean ...
cd
I'm guessing the lack of ReiserFS in FreeBSD is due to licensing issues (ReiserFS is GPL'd, and therefore can't be included in the FreeBSD kernel).
Are you forgetting UFS2. Of course, it's not the most innovative system around, but surely BSD filesystem development exists. I think UFS2 was integrated to FreeBSD a year or two ago? About, NetBSD's LFS, you are correct, it's not for production use. I don't know if anyone is working to get it stabilized, there has been some interest...
hrmmm... > man cvsup ?? Maybe thats just too complicated...
One of the things I like about OpenBSD is that they actually remove crusty, unmaintained, or otherwise useless ports. I'm curious as to how well pruned the FreeBSD ports tree happens to be... Anyone?
first of all, kazaa can use any port to communicate on, including port 80, so unless your willing to block all net access, even to browsers, you cant stop kazaa, second your way off topic from the freebsd ports that were talking about. thanks for shopping at /. please come again.
Noone writes jokes in base 13!
Does the phrase: "Crusty, unmaintained, or otherwise useless" ring any bells?
Not a very good example of PHK going over the edge. After all, he's responding to the rather infamous Theo deRaadt
It could if they wanted to include it. But the ratio of interest among the knowledgeable and skill developers to the amount of interest by the mouth breathing power-user crowd is quite low.
for real servers use real software:
Microsoft Windows 98 4.10.1998
Clean install using Full OEM
Uptime: 0:05:39:37
rock solid. tried and true. bsd is dead.
Not a BSD bash, or a ports manager bash, as they all do great work..
:)
Its just irritating when I keep running up to a port that just wont cooperate... Or one that doesnt have a cooresponding package, for low resource machines..
Again, its not a bash.. I love BSD and all the good parts of it... But nothing is perfect
---- Booth was a patriot ----
It hurts 'n' stuff.
*prods the body* halllloooo ??!!
Where have you gone *BSD? No one home. sob.
There is an interesting follow-up thread in the Nero-Online BSD Tech Center's message boards. Check it out.
I've been using Free for years as well as Open and Linux, and one thing I want to point out without sounding trollish is that FreeBSD, and certain distributions of Linux (right now using Slack9) have become extremely bloated.
When I order my Free cd's I never get passed using only one cd, and I know there has to be others who've done (and are doing) the same.
I originally switched from Mac (System 7.0) to Windows, then to Linux, then to BSD (Open) because at the time it was lightweight. Enough to accomplish whatever I wanted to do without having to wait for $X amount of uneccessary 's/garbage/binaries/g' to load.
After recently tinkering with an older machine I have here (PII 233) I decided to whip out Free and install it to tinker with it as a bastion host or something similar. However, after installing Free (4.1 at that) the machine was super slow (mind you it has 512mb of RAM), and I felt as if Free and Linux (which did the same after I fdisk'd BSD to try Slack on the machine), have simply gone the route of the `other` bloatware bandit known as XP.
MoFscker