Why do you use FreeBSD on desktop?

taiwan740 said:
So pkg "knows" you have installed xorg from ports, for example.
Click to expand...
I don't think pkg really knows whether Xorg is from ports or a package repo... /var/db/pkg will record installed package name and version, but not where it's from... command pkg info -o is the closest thing I can find in pkg(8), but I think it will only tell you if the package is from -quarterly or -latest repo... so absence of such information can hint at (but not confirm) the idea that it might be from ports. Even then, package origin is usually specified in /etc/pkg.conf...

FWIW, the Makefiles in Ports first apply FreeBSD patches, and THEN do the ./configure && make from the original tarball anyway.

Just cloning from github is likely to result in compilation failures anyway, which is why we have the Porter's Handbook.
 
taiwan740 said:
… if you do a kernel/world update like to STABLE or CURRENT, some things that are already installed with pkg, you need to reinstall with ports. …
Click to expand...

My step up from 14.0-CURRENT to 15.0-CURRENT was largely unremarkable.

I locked net/onedrive to prevent removal, the FreeBSD-provided version built on 1400078 continues to work in a 1500001/1500003 user environment (no surprise there).
 
astyle said:
I don't think pkg really knows whether Xorg is from ports or a package repo …
Click to expand...

See the full output from pkg-info(8), annotations in particular.

An example, something that was packaged by ports-mgmt/poudriere-devel, my local poudriere repository:

Code: 
% pkg info nvidia-driver-470 | grep -A 15 Annotations
Annotations    :
        FreeBSD_version: 1500001
        build_timestamp: 2023-09-26T18:01:46+0000
        built_by       : poudriere-git-3.3.99.20220831
        port_checkout_unclean: no
        port_git_hash  : 9b280ab321
        ports_top_checkout_unclean: yes
        ports_top_git_hash: b68b6be228
        repo_type      : binary
        repository     : poudriere
Flat size      : 215MiB
Description    :
These are the official NVidia binary drivers for hardware OpenGL rendering
in X11, using the GLX extensions.
%

Annotations for net/citrix_ica installed from ports are much terser than annotations for www/firefox installed with a FreeBSD-provided package:

Code: 
% pkg info net/citrix_ica | grep -A 2 Annotations
Annotations    :
        FreeBSD_version: 1400093
Flat size      : 54.8MiB
% pkg info www/firefox | grep -A 12 Annotations
Annotations    :
        FreeBSD_version: 1500003
        build_timestamp: 2023-11-07T23:00:59+0000
        built_by       : poudriere-git-3.3.0-1251-ge8a0e12e
        cpe            : cpe:2.3:a:mozilla:firefox:119.0.1:::::freebsd15:x64
        no_provide_shlib: yes
        port_checkout_unclean: no
        port_git_hash  : 1e61d415572
        ports_top_checkout_unclean: no
        ports_top_git_hash: d5268d5f715
        repo_type      : binary
        repository     : FreeBSD
Flat size      : 245MiB
%

I don't have any other ports example, I assume that the dearth of information (one annotation alone) is a tell-tale sign.
 
Isn't that annotations added by poudriere?
ImageMagick7 from pkg
Code: 
pkg info ImageMagick7

Annotations    :
        FreeBSD_version: 1400097
        cpe            : cpe:2.3:a:imagemagick:imagemagick:7.1.0.62:::::freebsd14:x64:7
        flavor         : x11
qt5-webkit
Code: 
pkg info qt5-webkit

Annotations    :
        FreeBSD_version: 1400097
        deprecated     : No longer actively maintained, increasing security concers
        expiration_date: 2023-12-31

Edit:
ImageMagick7 from pkg.
pkg info ImageMagick7
ABI = "FreeBSD:14:amd64"
Code: 
Version        : 7.1.0.62_7

Annotations    :
        FreeBSD_version: 1400097
        cpe            : cpe:2.3:a:imagemagick:imagemagick:7.1.0.62:::::freebsd14:x64:7
        flavor         : x11
ABI = "FreeBSD:13:amd64"
Code: 
Version        : 7.1.0.62_8

Annotations    :
        FreeBSD_version: 1302001
        build_timestamp: 2023-11-07T01:26:55+0000
        built_by       : poudriere-git-3.3.0-1251-ge8a0e12e
        cpe            : cpe:2.3:a:imagemagick:imagemagick:7.1.0.62:::::freebsd13:x64:8
        flavor         : x11
        port_checkout_unclean: no
        port_git_hash  : fcf68ae5ecb
        ports_top_checkout_unclean: no
        ports_top_git_hash: d5268d5f715
qt5-webkit
ABI = "FreeBSD:13:amd64"
Code: 
Annotations    :
        FreeBSD_version: 1302001
        build_timestamp: 2023-11-07T01:45:25+0000
        built_by       : poudriere-git-3.3.0-1251-ge8a0e12e
        deprecated     : No longer actively maintained, increasing security concers
        expiration_date: 2023-12-31
        port_checkout_unclean: no
        port_git_hash  : e8e65e7574d
        ports_top_checkout_unclean: no
        ports_top_git_hash: d5268d5f715
 
vermaden said:
Most mine reasons here:

vermaden.wordpress.com

Quare FreeBSD?

I really wanted to make this article short … but I failed miserably. At least I tried to organize it well so one may get back to it after ‘some’ reading because its not a short le…
vermaden.wordpress.com vermaden.wordpress.com
Click to expand...

I wanted to title it Why FreeBSD? but when you type that into your favorite duck.com search engine there are so many similar articles. I wanted it to have distinguished and unique name so I used Latin word for ‘why‘ which is ‘quare‘.
Click to expand...

From Spanish, Para qué is commonly translated as Why / Por qué, while Por qué is less expressive, where personal reasons are intrinsically sought.
I only saw the expression What for? in a book by Tolstoy. What for / Para qué offers a different perspective, it doesn't demand a biased answer but the real reason why you take one action and not another, something like the Japanese Five Whys method. That's why I think What for has a better approach than Why.
"Quare?" that sounds too unnatural. No one (an indexer) will find that article without a good string of tags behind it.

What for FreeBSD?

What for may not have enough temperament for English speakers. In my country, we tend to express ourselves terribly. For example, we use "I have to do" (obligation) instead of "I want to do" (desire), so we are not aware of our bias when speaking.
 
Last edited:
CuatroTorres said:
From Spanish, Para qué is commonly translated as Why / Por qué, while Por qué is less expressive, where personal reasons are intrinsically sought.
Click to expand...

En français, 'pourquoi':
pour quelle raison, dans quelle intention ?
Again, commonly 'why'.

Pourquoi 'quare'? Pourquoi pas?

CuatroTorres said:
That's why I think What for has a better approach than Why.
"Quare?" that sounds too unnatural. No one (an indexer) will find that article without a good string of tags behind it.
Click to expand...

It serves as being distinctive though. I wouldn't remember, but that's what bookmarks are for, and a truly worthy bookmark, thanks vermaden!

CuatroTorres said:
What for FreeBSD?

What for may not have enough temperament for English speakers. In my country, we tend to express ourselves terribly. For example, we use "I have to do" (obligation) instead of "I want to do" (desire), so we are not aware of our bias when speaking. Either way, "what for" can be distinguishing among many "whys" in the eyes of the reader.

IMHO.
Click to expand...

English speakers have a saying 'splitting hairs' 😈

cheers
 
CuatroTorres said:
From Spanish, Para qué is commonly translated as Why / Por qué, while Por qué is less expressive, where personal reasons are intrinsically sought.
Click to expand...
I see your point. There is a subtle difference there.

CuatroTorres said:
What for FreeBSD?
Click to expand...
That's not really grammatical. It would have to be something like "for what purposes do you use Freebsd?", but that's wordy and ungainly. Maybe the more idiomatic "How do you use Freebsd?" That would be literally como in Spanish, which maybe is not what you're after. The Spanish "how" has a bias towards "how" in the sense of "give me a list of steps", but in English its meaning is a little more general.
 
I know. I was waiting for someone to confirm it. It's more of an interjection. FreeBSD: What for?
I don't want to make any more noise about it. Add cool tags like Fortnite or Karol G to bring new eyes to the project. x)
 
CuatroTorres said:
From Spanish, Para qué is commonly translated as Why / Por qué, while Por qué is less expressive, where personal reasons are intrinsically sought.
Click to expand...

I always translate why? as ¿por qué? and for what?/what for? as ¿para qué?
¿por qué? -> what are your reasons for use FreeBSD ... easy to install? not Windows/MAC/linux? to experiment new systems?
¿para qué? -> what are the uses you give to FreeBSD? ... servers? desktop? embebed systems?

Two different question clauses... at least in Spain and for plain/direct questions (rhetoric, sarcastic or similar discurses can distort or change the meanings).
Although is not strange to mix the clauses depending the context.

Regards.
 
CuatroTorres said:
I only saw the expression What for? in a book by Tolstoy.
Click to expand...
Now, that expression has several context-sensitive translations into something that an English speaker would understand...
  • In the link that I'm quoting, the expression "What for?" means a vehement disagreement with an unfair reaction/decision. As in, "What did you hit me for? What did I do to deserve that?!?". Tolstoy's book was a reaction to unfair imprisonments and arrests, BTW.
  • Another translation of "What for?" is "Why do you even care? Does this even matter?"
  • Sometimes, "What for?" is a poor choice of words for the context... like, it may not get the answer you're looking for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top