On 2003-04-02 23:28, Dan Naumov <dan.naumov_at_ofw.fi> wrote: >On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 21:56:40 +0200 >Wilko Bulte <wkb_at_freebie.xs4all.nl> wrote: >>On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 02:29:30PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: >>> >>> I find an odd situation here whenever this topic comes up. One the >>> one hand, people are always wanting to split the entire base system >>> up into small packages for each little piece of the base. On the >>> other hand, one of FreeBSD's selling points in real-world >>> environments is that it doesn't have a bunch of little packages for >>> the base system like Linux distros. Do people really prefer >>> something like having rpm's for /bin/ps to having one lump base dist >>> for all of /bin, /sbin, etc.? >> >> <Barf><Puke> One of the worst mis-features of Linux in my book. > > I think being able to update just about ANYTHING, except the kernel > without the need for a reboot is one of the best features of Linux and > actual advantages it has over FreeBSD. Well, this can be done in FreeBSD too. In general, you can update parts with: # cd /usr/src/some/path # make clean # make depend && make all # make install You will find that this often requires a lot of care and attention, and a whole lot of effort, just to avoid ending up with a mess. I'm positively sure that the same sort of care should be used when upgrading parts of a Linux system too. After 6 years of being a Slackware user who upgraded everything by compiling tarballs, apart from the occasional libc version which I installed as a precompiled package, I can tell you it felt like walking on a slippery slope a lot of the time :-) It's good to be able to upgrade a "base system" in one fell swoop. At least, it's good to me. - GiorgosReceived on Wed Apr 02 2003 - 12:09:32 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:02 UTC