DragonFly users List (threaded) for 2013-06
Re: Package download statistics
On 6/3/2013 23:04, Rumko wrote:
> John Marino wrote:
>> 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.
> Well, as above, the machine (admin?) specific options are to blame for at least
> a few (absolutely no idea how many in %), even fbsd ports/dports (IIRC) only
> build packages for the default options, so when you play around you can
> quickly doom yourself to source-only.
Yes, I think it's implicit that pre-built binary users are accepting the
default set of options and extending that thought, they are trusting the
pkgsrc/ports developers to select the defaults wisely.
> If I understand correctly, obsd ports seem to handle this way better than
> pkgsrc and (d/freebsd)ports, they seem to have these so-called flavors which
> actually tell what options are turned on/off. And IIRC ('twas quite a few
> years ago), the actual flavor was part of the package name, so theoretically,
> you could precompile all possible combinations of packages and their flavors.
> It would be quite interesting to see sth like that being put into
That would be an exponential explosion unfortunately. A port with only
4 options could be built 15 different ways. Some ports have 20 options.
A port like mongodb takes 1 hour to build and is a few hundred Mb in a
package. So the number of packages would literally be in the millions
and the amount of data required would fill up some Terrabyte drives I
would think. It's just not practical to do it automatically.
That leaves hand-selection. To some extent ports and pkgsrc already
does this (e.g. vim, vim-lite, emacs, emacs-nox11, etc).
The 1 flavor with good options seems to the best compromise as far as I