Hi,
Sorry for the title, I have no better idea at the moment. I have no intention to start flamewars and other religious discussion. I am merely looking to find out how mature and well designed is the package management in FreeBSD. I am currently using Debian, and while I have tried out FreeBSD a long time ago, I had to drop it since it was far from ready for the desktop (I forgot to mention: I'm a heavywheight laptop user). Now I want to try again, and want to know if FreeBSD's package manager performs at least as good as apt-get (or aptitude).
Main reason for choosing debian: thorough design of package manager and upgrade process (really: for me, this outwheighs anything else)
My main reasons I'm looking for alternatives to debian: slow release cycle
By thorough design I mean things like metapackages, virtual packages (two or more packages can provide the same functionality, for example Sun JDK and OpenJDK), auto installation flags (package X is installed explicitely or as a dependency for another package, management of configurations (a package can be REMOVED or PURGED, with the latter having the configuration files deleted as well), automatic action upon install (package X needs a kernel module or hook, and the package manager handles it), and there's probably more, but I don't know them all.
Basically, my expectation is that the package manager automates as much as possible. And the most important thing: the same should happen in a major upgrade (from 8.2 to 9.0). There are a ton of problems with the upgrade, and I'm expecting from the package manager to automate them as much as possible. Here are some example situation:
- package X was removed in version 9 and replaced with package Y -> I expect to have Y installed, and x removed
- new version of package X has different configuration scheme -> I expect automatic replacement of config files when possible, and warning when manual intervention is needed
- metapackage X includes some new packages and/or drops other -> I expect new packages to be installed automatically and old ones to be removed automatically
Bottom line, all this can be summarized in one sentence: I am looking for a robust OS, which I can install once and upgrade forever, with minimum intervernation (as much automation as possible).
I hear great things about FreeBSD, especially about the way it improved over the years, so I am asking you, FreeBSD fans, how close does FreeBSD come to my excentric package management needs? I know that in the past, FreeBSD emphasized source based installed, and using the ports collection was the preffered method to install packages and deal with dependencies, while pkg_add was merely a time saver. I also get the impression that this is not the case anymore, and that pkg_add (& co) can deliver a good job.
Thanks for reading and looking forward to your replies,
Razvan
Sorry for the title, I have no better idea at the moment. I have no intention to start flamewars and other religious discussion. I am merely looking to find out how mature and well designed is the package management in FreeBSD. I am currently using Debian, and while I have tried out FreeBSD a long time ago, I had to drop it since it was far from ready for the desktop (I forgot to mention: I'm a heavywheight laptop user). Now I want to try again, and want to know if FreeBSD's package manager performs at least as good as apt-get (or aptitude).
Main reason for choosing debian: thorough design of package manager and upgrade process (really: for me, this outwheighs anything else)
My main reasons I'm looking for alternatives to debian: slow release cycle
By thorough design I mean things like metapackages, virtual packages (two or more packages can provide the same functionality, for example Sun JDK and OpenJDK), auto installation flags (package X is installed explicitely or as a dependency for another package, management of configurations (a package can be REMOVED or PURGED, with the latter having the configuration files deleted as well), automatic action upon install (package X needs a kernel module or hook, and the package manager handles it), and there's probably more, but I don't know them all.
Basically, my expectation is that the package manager automates as much as possible. And the most important thing: the same should happen in a major upgrade (from 8.2 to 9.0). There are a ton of problems with the upgrade, and I'm expecting from the package manager to automate them as much as possible. Here are some example situation:
- package X was removed in version 9 and replaced with package Y -> I expect to have Y installed, and x removed
- new version of package X has different configuration scheme -> I expect automatic replacement of config files when possible, and warning when manual intervention is needed
- metapackage X includes some new packages and/or drops other -> I expect new packages to be installed automatically and old ones to be removed automatically
Bottom line, all this can be summarized in one sentence: I am looking for a robust OS, which I can install once and upgrade forever, with minimum intervernation (as much automation as possible).
I hear great things about FreeBSD, especially about the way it improved over the years, so I am asking you, FreeBSD fans, how close does FreeBSD come to my excentric package management needs? I know that in the past, FreeBSD emphasized source based installed, and using the ports collection was the preffered method to install packages and deal with dependencies, while pkg_add was merely a time saver. I also get the impression that this is not the case anymore, and that pkg_add (& co) can deliver a good job.
Thanks for reading and looking forward to your replies,
Razvan