|
|
|
|
|
by wsfull
1849 days ago
|
|
Why are you comparing pkgsrc to pacman. The orginal comparison suggested in the parent comment was between xbps and nixpkgs or other Linux package managers. pkgsrc boostraps itself using a program called "boostrap" in the pkgsrc directory. It builds a version of NetBSD's GCC toolchain and has no reliance on the host's userland. IME, this is very reliable and is its single greatest strength. Beyond that, pkgsrc is only as good as the build processes chosen by the author(s) of the software being built. These of course vary widely in sanity and depending on the packages one is building the otherwsise sane pkgsrc build process can quickly become a black box with packages that pull in many dependencies. It does break sometimes, but this is a fault of the target software authors, not pkgsrc. pkgsrc is first and foremost a system for building packages.
Linux distributions OTOH tend to be much more focused on binary package managers. Most Linux users do not build packages from source. There is really no comparison. Your comments do not sound like those of a daily NetBSD user. I have been one for the last 15 years and am therefore all too familiar /usr/share/mk. Most Linux users do not seem very comfortable with BSD makefiles. |
|
The original commented suggested that XBPS was similar to pkgsrc. I suggested that XBPS has far more in common with Arch Linux's package manager than pkgsrc or anything else in the BSD world. As you yourself note in your next paragraph...
> Your comments do not sound like those of a daily NetBSD user.
I have commit access. Since three years ago. My name is on the latest release announcement.
You prick.