Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] SourceMage Binary Grimoire Proposal

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Jayce^ <jason AT plug.org>
  • To: Source Mage Discuss <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Cc: Dufflebunk <dufflebunk AT go-nix.ca>
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] SourceMage Binary Grimoire Proposal
  • Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 15:51:46 -0600

On Sunday 03 August 2003 04:43 pm, Dufflebunk wrote:
> A slightly related topic is that of binary packages for smgl. I am against
> this, not for any practical reason though, but for the philisophical reason
> that smgl is a source distro. It's designed as such, and although extending
> to handle binary packages is quite possible, it would never be as good as
> the current offerings in the binary world. Just as no mater how hard binary
> distros try, they are unable to make as good source based packages as soucr
> based distros have.
>
I can't quite agree with this. Binaries have a couple of good points.
a) fast to install (this is great when you need a system up now, and can
compile later)
b) rescue. Not too long ago I had a box that went to hell during updates.
*nothing* would compile anymore, and I couldnt' fix it. Finally the system
was saved when a couple people let me grab their cached compiles, and I could
"resurrect" them. Once those pieces were upgraded with binaries, I was able
to doing my own rebuilds.

Sure I want a source compile, and I want it optimized for my system, but if
somebody has already done exactly that, I'll take their binary, no problem.

--
Jayce^

Attachment: pgpSrrQeKDJCt.pgp
Description: signature




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page