ports vs. packages

[leegold]

Trying to get a handle on difference between ports
and packages re: FreeBsd.

"To Port" the verb, means to make an application,
a program "runnable" on a particular OS.

"A Port" the noun, is usually source code, config
scripts, other stuff, that a user runs the "make"
command on to compile & install a new program.

A Package is a (compiled) binary, along with
"other stuff" that installs a new program.

FreeBsd has a ports collection which we can install
on our system it serves as kind of a database to
tell us what ports and pakages ie. what programs
we have installed.

Is this close to reality?

Thanks.

PS given a choice between
installing a program via a port vs. a package
what should one do?

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majo...@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-newbies" in the body of the message

[Freddie Cash]

On 19 Nov 2001 at 22:23, leegold wrote:
> Trying to get a handle on difference between ports
> and packages re: FreeBsd.

> "To Port" the verb, means to make an application,
> a program "runnable" on a particular OS.

Yes. It usually involves recompiling and/or patching the program to
run natively (or via a native compatibility layer) on the new OS.

> "A Port" the noun, is usually source code, config
> scripts, other stuff, that a user runs the "make"
> command on to compile & install a new program.

Yes.

> A Package is a (compiled) binary, along with
> "other stuff" that installs a new program.

A package is a pre-compiled port. Installing a package is *exactly*
the same as installing the port of the same name, only you don't have
to wait for it to compile.

> FreeBsd has a ports collection which we can install
> on our system it serves as kind of a database to
> tell us what ports and pakages ie. what programs
> we have installed.

No. The ports tree is a source code skeleton that lets you see just
what programs are *available* for FreeBSD. You can search the tree,
install programs, update programs, remove programs, etc. It's merely
a simple way to see what's available and to compile it specifically
for your system.

The database of what's installed on your system is stored in
/var/db/pkg (or something close to that ... I'm on a WinNT box right
now).

> Is this close to reality?

Pretty close.

> PS given a choice between
> installing a program via a port vs. a package
> what should one do?

If you have a fast machine (anything over a Pentium Pro), I'd compile
a port. That way, it's compiled and optimised for your CPU.
Packages are all compiled for the generic 386 instructions.

If you have a slow machine, or a slow Internet connection, or you
want to install a certain application on multiple boxes, then I'd use
a package.

Cheers,
Freddie PhoenixTek Consulting
fc...@bigfoot.com Unix / Networking Services
(250) 314-4029

[David Johnson]

leegold wrote:

> PS given a choice between
> installing a program via a port vs. a package
> what should one do?

I always use ports. The packages are precompiled for 386 cpus, while I
have an Athlon. By changing /etc/make.conf, and can have every port
optimized for the Athlon. For some programs this doesn't make much of a
speed difference, but for others it is very significant. In addition,
you have the opportunity to "customize" the port. For example, I like
the dia program but the package has it built for GNOME which I don't
use. By editing the port Makefile I can build dia for GTK+ only.

On the flip side, the time spent compiling ports may not be worth it to
you.

David