install a por

[Jan Stary]

On Sep 23 10:57:22, allbery.b at gmail.com wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Jan Stary <hans at stare.cz> wrote:
> > Have a look at OpenBSD's pkg_add(1)
>
> pkg is great if you can get away with defaults for everything. I always
> find myself forced into ports....


Putting back the context that you stripped:

On Sep 05 16:48:44, allbery.b at gmail.com wrote:
> >> I've used FreeBSD's port system for ages, and yeah,
> >> the Mac beats it hands down.
> >
> > Well, it is very good but I feel the FBSD's is just as good. And AFAIK the
> > former is based/inspired on the latter, or am I mistaken?
> 
> MacPorts is based on the *BSD pkgsrc/ports system, but greatly improved; it
> took years for BSD ports to come up with a reasonable way to handle
> upgrading ports, and `port upgrade outdated` still handles cases that
> `portupgrade` and `portmaster -a` don't (checking for manual upgrade
> actions in /usr/ports/UPDATING is still essential). I'm just getting back
> into the FreeBSD world and ports still feels rather primitive after
> MacPorts.

Have a look at OpenBSD's pkg_add(1).
My point being specifically 'pkg_add -u'
which handles the updates _very_ well.

> pkg is great if you can get away with defaults for everything.
> I always find myself forced into ports....

The difference between being happy with the precompiled package
and finding oneself in the need to recompile the port with some option
is not particular to pkg_add, macports, or any other packaging system:
the same situation can arise in any of those, depending just on
whether the packager likes the same defaults that you like.

Generaly, I find the precompiled defaults quite sensible
in most of the packaging systems, having subpackages/flavors/variants etc.
it surprises me that you "always" need to compile the port yourself.

	Jan