On 8/31/2012 19:05, Izaac wrote:
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 06:08:26PM +0200, John Marino wrote:To be fair, on FreeBSD a "port" refers to the set of files in the ports tree that build a package. With pkgsrc, _BOTH_ the set of files AND the built software are called a package. I find that highly awkward and FreeBSD doesn't have this ambiguity.Co-opting existing, general terms for a specific community is no way to resolve ambiguity. But I'd be willing to entertain your definitions ... if their invalidity weren't demonstrated in this very thread by the self-described FreeBSD user himself.
I wish people were less cryptic on these lists. I don't know what any of that intends to convey. 1) Somebody made a point that set-of-files on pkgsrc aren't called ports. Ports are FreeBSD-specific term that FreeBSD mangled because it goes against the general definition of what "porting" is. 2) I said, true, but at least set-of-files and package are called different things and thus are not ambiguous, a minor thing pkgsrc suffers.
I don't what is "invalid" about any of this. They aren't my definitions, I'm just stating what I understand to be the case.