Subject: Re: Compilation times...
To: Matthias Buelow <email@example.com>
From: Richard Rauch <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/08/2005 04:44:46
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 06:00:04PM +0100, Matthias Buelow wrote:
> Richard Rauch wrote:
> >Being updated quarterly is nice, I guess, but security advisories tend
> >be more frequent than just on quarterly taggings of pkgsrc. (^&
> I sincerely hope that the stable branch of pkgsrc (including binary
> builds) doesn't lag behind in security updates...
I thought that there was some concern whether the pkgsrc quarterly update
would include, e.g., firefox 1.0.1.
And I thought that you were suggesting that quarterly-updated binary
packages was a great accomplishment. (It might well be, but it is
not very useful to me if I need to update more often than once
every 3 months.)
Let's ignore the fact that my sparse package network can probably be
updated more rapidly than a bulk-build that may require many packages
to be updated. Let's ignore that I haven't seriously considered
downloading binary packages in preference to building from pkgsrc even
on my second-slowest machine (a PII) in 5 or more years. Let's ignore
that there are build options I would like to exercise for some packages
(such as *not* "A4" paper size defaults).
Instead, let's go with your suggestion. Taking a quick survey of a
handful of packages that I use, there are no pre-built packages
for my primary system. (Hint: It's not an i386.)
A number of packages that I'm interested in are only built for 4 or 5
platforms (octave-current and bzflag being the two that I noticed).
"I probably don't know what I'm talking about." http://www.olib.org/~rkr/