I do a clean install whenever Patrick does a release, every year or so.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-31 22:37
I portupgrade about once a month on all my systems. Running the RELENG_7 branch and only do kernel updates when they bump the revision number (7.1 is due out in a couple months -- hopefully everything will go smoothly).
Been thinking about trying out Arch on my desktop, but then I'd have no i386 machine to test my patches on :(
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-31 23:04
I prefer to launch /System/Library/CoreServices/Software Update.appmanually.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-31 23:12
>>10
Have you ever had problems using the binary packages on ftp.FreeBSD.org?
Updating them seems to be a bitch, and I'm too fucking impatient to fucking compile Xorg and Firefox from ports.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-31 23:32
>>12
As scary as it sounds, I've never even considered using binary packages. It took me a day or so to get everything compiled and working, and (excepting problems which some times crop up in UPDATING) just rebuild shit overnight with portupgrade --batch -arR.
What kinds of problems are the binary packages giving you?
>>14
Freeware is a 90's term to describe non-free software that was distributed at zero cost. Do you mean free software, as in software that has and gives freedom?
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-01 0:20
>>16,10
FreeBSD is a 90's term to describe non-free software that was distributed at zero cost. Do you mean GNU/GPL software, as in software that has and gives freedom?
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-01 0:44
>>13
Well, there are a couple things. I installed 7.0-RELEASE and then set an environment variable so that pkg_add -r would get the latest packages, rather than the ones built for 7.0-RELEASE. I dunno if that's a problem, I don't see why it would be, but some of that packages that I installed had older versions installed from the initial setup (I chose to include Xorg and some other things in sysinstall. Anyway, I tried installing Firefox 3.0, and threw a huge amount of errors and reinstalled a newer version of Xorg I think, and basically everything got fucked up.
apt-get update is run od -vAn -N2 -tu4 < /dev/urandom seconds after midnight and changelogs are mailed to me.
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-01 9:34
>>24
The part about enforcing freedom shouldn't be explained beforehand. What really matters is that GPL is for free software, while BSD is for Open-source. Whenever Apple or Microsoft talks about free software, they call it "Open-source" and "Linux" (instead of the proper term). That's what this struggle is really about and we shouldn't be hypocrites about it.
>>26
Free software has nothing to do with Free Software™®.
Anything you can download for free is free software.
Your ``proper term'' is cultist bullshit.
>>7
I like it just fine. For me, packages are the most important part of a Linux distro: the ones you get by default, how you manage them and how good the repos are. I think Arch does these all great.
You just get a small set of core packages by default (no X etc). pacman does a good job at managing binary packages; my only problem with it was that it's slightly cryptic. ABS makes it piss easy to build binary packages from source.
There are a lot of ABS build scripts both in the official repos and the arch user repository. Binaries for x86 and x86-64 are maintained pretty well: software is usually updated within a few weeks from the official release. Flagging things out of date really seems to work; last week I flagged ed out of date because 1.0 was released about 5 days ago, and 1 day later it was updated.
>>30 the stable package has been out of date 1.5 year, the testing and unstable packages for 1 year
Security-critical updates are pushed out more quickly than updates to '70s abandonware.
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-01 13:42
>>30 pacman does a good job at managing binary packages; my only problem with it was that it's slightly cryptic.
Compared to what?
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-01 14:05
>>1 or Mac OS X
What's the matter? Too [u][b]UNIX[/b][/u] for you?
>>38
Because GNU ed v1.0 only came out August 21st and isn't a high priority package. Testing takes time, and other packages take priority.
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-01 15:35
I have run all but dry of understanding for programmers that willfully pick anything else than OS X as their platform of choice. I know a few that are still stuck in the rut for various reasons -- none of them desire.
Apple will continue to trounce everyone else for the preferred geek platform. The stigma of not being able to use Textmate will increase (watch the Rails screencasts).
>>40
Enjoy your five supported pieces of hardware and your Fisherprice OS.
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-01 15:53
>>40
Textmate is a fucking piece of shit. People who use the mouse for text editing should be thrown into a fire.
Also, OS X is too dumbed down for a REAL programmer. There's not much customization possible and everyone charges money for their stupid little scripts. Have fun buying a graphical version of grep for $20.
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-01 15:58
>>42
Making your desktop look like shit makes you an EXPERT PROGRAMMER?
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-01 16:20
>>39
It's fucking ed. How much testing does it needs? Not to mention Debian people should really shut the fuck up and not mess with other people's code, at least Apple doesn't fucking break my openssl because ``valgrind was bitching''.
>>42 not much customization possible
What the hell do you want to customize? Do you think REAL programmers waste their time changing the color of their kernel panic message (actually, you can do this on OS X). It's a UNIX with a non-crap GUI with the bonus of being able to run proprietary applications.
everyone charges money for their stupid little scripts
This annoys me as well. Some idiot writes a shit GUI wrapper to do a couple of basic operations and puts a $9.99 tag on it. Solution: You don't need shit GUI applications. Most of those stupid little scripts are 10 lines in perl. For everything else, there's MacPorts (or fink, but Debian Stable is more recent than fink).
I agree with you on Textmate, though. I don't know what the hype is all about, it's just a completely normal text editor.
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-01 17:21
>>39 only came out August 21st
The maintainer is well aware it is out and has even backported a security fix.
Testing takes time
Program testing has already been done upstream. The only testing that might need to be done is for packaging.
So why don't they fucking put it in the testing or unstable repo if they're so god damn unsure.
So why don't they fucking put it in the testing or unstable repo
The old ed(1) package manager had been AWOL for about a year, in the past week or so someone else has taken over the package.
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-01 17:45
non-crap GUI
the OS X GUI is crap.
how do i maximize a window?
how do i maximize a window horizontally or vertically while leaving the other dimension the same?
how do i resize a window from the top left corner? how about the top right corner? or the bottom left corner?
how do i make fonts not look like crap (bold and blurry all the time)? seriously guys, even microsoft's cleartype does better than that.
the bonus of being able to run proprietary applications.
that's the only reason i have linux installed, to run a proprietary application that only runs on solaris and linux (sun studio).
the fact that linux is a non-free open source operating system doesn't prevent anyone from releasing proprietary applications for it... sun studio, skype, opera, flash player, etc.
only the omg optimized crowd runs a window manager not provided by gnome/kde
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-01 18:41
>>48
Once you lose OS X's fancy GUI, exactly what are the differences between it and any other Unix-like, except for the fact that it's slower and runs on less hardware?
>>50
You've never used xmonad, I take it?
I agree that people just using ``light-weight'' knock-offs of Metacity or KWin tend to be morons, but there are window managers that actually have advantages over the vanilla options.
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-01 18:46
>>47
You must meditate further before you reach enlightenment.
>>51
Once you remove all the command line software from linux, what remains but most unusable software on earth?
HEY LOOK ME TOO I CAN TOTALLY MISS THE POINT OF THINGS
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-01 20:16
>>57
OH HIA IM AN ELEITEST FAG IF YOU DON'T USE LINUX AND OPEN SOURSE SOFTWARE YOU SUCK LOLOLOLOL
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-01 20:22
>>61 >>57 is a macfag.
he uses inferior closed source software and is an elitist fag anyway.
>>60
haha, if you removed all the command-line tools from my machine, all you'd have left is the kernel and Firefox. Only faggots use GUIs that aren't a webbrowser!!!!
>>60
You suck at reading comprehension. I hope you realise this by now.
>>65
You say that as if you think it's insightful. It's obvious that something much more powerful will have a somewhat less intuitive interface than something that can do only a handful of things.
Say what you will about the GIMP, but at least its scripting engine uses Scheme.
>>69
That's not what I meant. Stabbing yourself in the nuts repeatedly is a more enjoyable experience than using the GIMP.
If you need serious graphics software, you use photoshop.
If you need batch processing, you use imagemagick.
If you want to crop a photograph and add a caption, you use paint.net, or even mspaint.
You never use the GIMP, no matter what.
>>77
if a plugin can crash a browser, it's not just the plugin that's at fault. but mozilla doesn't fix bugs like that in firefox.
or if a module can crash a kernel, it's not just the module that's at fault. but linus doesn't fix bugs like that in the linux kernel.
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-02 3:41
>>78
Both of your examples are caused because of the design of both programs you cite. Google Chrome aims to solve the browser plugin problem by separating the browser into multiple processes, and microkernels have provided a model for building robust kernels for years. For Firefox/Linux to get fixed, they'll have to have major design changes.
>>79 >>76's problem is caused because of the design of the X server. For it to get fixed, the X server will have to have major design changes.
That still doesn't mean it shouldn't be fixed.
>>89
The GIMP doesn't, in my experience, but since any idiot with a compiler can write code, it's important that an application can only crash itself and its children.
There's no such thing as a perfect system, but when something not specifically written to fuck shit up can bring down your entire X session, the problem is not just with that one application.
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-02 18:31
Let's just go back to single address-space architectures.
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-02 19:17
>>91
IPC would be faster. Just look at what the Amiga could pull off.
Name:
Anonymous2008-09-02 19:27
>>89
But it CAN, and since the window manager is the lower-level service, it has to withstand bullshit.
When I produce exquisite pieces of ART, I don't want eight EXTRA MEGABYTES of worthless color palettes and paintbrush positioning code! I just want an ImageEditor!!
Not a "GIMPitor". Not a "Mario Paintitor". Those aren't even WORDS!!!! ImageMagick! ImageMagick! ImageMagick IS THE STANDARD!!!