I wish FreeBSD would use stow to manage everything in base.
I have been a FreeBSD user since 2.0, it's great. The only rub is I've always disliked having everything included with "base". Often I use NetBSD or OpenBSD just so I don't have to install gcc or perl (I'm lazy).
What I'd really like is if FreeBSD would use stow http://www.gnu.org/software/stow/stow.html to manage gcc, sendmail, bind, perl etc.. (tho there is now mailwrapper and perl has been removed from base in 5) I think the author of mailwrapper saw a problem w/ lack of flexability having everything within base and made an attempt to fix this. Tho mailrapper works, I think stow would have been a better solution.
I think it would really make life easier using stow to manage packages.
Just an idea. Thanks for taking time to read my comment.
Slashdot Mirror
as stated in my original comment.
I wish FreeBSD would use stow to manage everything in base.
to manage gcc, sendmail, bind, perl etc.. (tho there is now mailwrapper and perl has been removed from base in 5) I think the author of mailwrapper saw a problem w/ lack of flexability having everything within base and made an attempt to fix this. Tho mailrapper works, I think stow would have been a better solution.
I have been a FreeBSD user since 2.0, it's great. The only rub is I've always disliked having everything included with "base". Often I use NetBSD or OpenBSD just so I don't have to install gcc or perl (I'm lazy).
What I'd really like is if FreeBSD would use stow
http://www.gnu.org/software/stow/stow.html
I think it would really make life easier using stow to manage packages.
Just an idea. Thanks for taking time to read my comment.
Out of IPs? Well, let them eat cake!