Arch vs BSD

rasat · 2010-09-07 08:03:36

In Wikipedia describing the features of Arch is that it uses a BSD-style init framework. Today I read in DistroWatch about "compare and contrast BSD Ports and Linux package management", doesn't Arch has another BSD feature as well.

The ports system provides Makefiles, allowing you to pass make targets and compile your own software. The packages system provides pre-compiled binaries, allowing you to quickly install software from the command line.
.... supports both compile-your-own and installing pre-compiled software using command-line tools.

http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20100906#qa

karol · 2010-09-07 10:31:55

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arc … management
Arch also provides a ports-like package build system (...)

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arc … ns#FreeBSD
Both Arch and FreeBSD offer software which can be obtained using binaries or compiled using 'ports' systems.

Sorry, I think I've missed your point. We have that in the wiki, so ...?

rasat · 2010-09-07 13:41:42

The point is that Arch package management is BSD oriented but why its not mentioned anywhere. This feature adds another uniqueness in Arch.

litemotiv · 2010-09-07 13:52:49

Doesn't (almost) every distro have both a binary and manual compilation feature? At least Debian/Ubuntu has had it for years now, even though it's not as KISS as the Arch approach.

karol · 2010-09-07 16:13:59

rasat wrote:

The point is that Arch package management is BSD oriented but why its not mentioned anywhere. This feature adds another uniqueness in Arch.

You mean it's not mentioned on DW?

IIRC OpenBSD recommends using the binaries rather than rolling your own, at least for the stuff they provide.

.:B:. · 2010-09-07 20:23:18

litemotiv wrote:

Doesn't (almost) every distro have both a binary and manual compilation feature? At least Debian/Ubuntu has had it for years now, even though it's not as KISS as the Arch approach.

I have never seen a Linux distro make compiling your own packages instead of using the stock binary ones as easy as Arch. ABS is a real framework, all you have to do is run 'abs' in your terminal and you'll pull in all the PKGBUILDs, patches etc. necessary for rebuilding every single package in the Arch repositories.

litemotiv · 2010-09-07 21:37:29

.:B:. wrote:

I have never seen a Linux distro make compiling your own packages instead of using the stock binary ones as easy as Arch. ABS is a real framework, all you have to do is run 'abs' in your terminal and you'll pull in all the PKGBUILDs, patches etc. necessary for rebuilding every single package in the Arch repositories.

Ubuntu:

$ apt-get build-dep $package  // builds dependencies of package
$ apt-get source $package     // get source of any package in repositories
$ checkinstall                // create .deb from source directory

Stebalien · 2010-09-07 21:44:58

Just to avoid confusion, checkinstall is only used for non Debian source tarballs. To build a Debian source package (one you get from apt-get source), use debuild.

rasat · 2010-09-07 22:09:17

karol wrote:

You mean it's not mentioned on DW?

In Arch wiki and other documentations. There is only about the init system, same as in Wikipedia as I mentioned earlier.

.:B:. · 2010-09-07 22:12:40

litemotiv wrote:

.:B:. wrote:
I have never seen a Linux distro make compiling your own packages instead of using the stock binary ones as easy as Arch. ABS is a real framework, all you have to do is run 'abs' in your terminal and you'll pull in all the PKGBUILDs, patches etc. necessary for rebuilding every single package in the Arch repositories.
Ubuntu:
$ apt-get build-dep $package  // builds dependencies of package
$ apt-get source $package     // get source of any package in repositories
$ checkinstall                // create .deb from source directory

Good to know - but boy I know to stay away from those control files .

yejun · 2010-09-07 22:31:10

litemotiv wrote:

Doesn't (almost) every distro have both a binary and manual compilation feature? At least Debian/Ubuntu has had it for years now, even though it's not as KISS as the Arch approach.

Gentoo has no binary.

cesura · 2010-09-07 22:41:52

yejun wrote:

litemotiv wrote:
Doesn't (almost) every distro have both a binary and manual compilation feature? At least Debian/Ubuntu has had it for years now, even though it's not as KISS as the Arch approach.
Gentoo has no binary.

fukawi2 · 2010-09-07 23:14:06

litemotiv wrote:

.:B:. wrote:
I have never seen a Linux distro make compiling your own packages instead of using the stock binary ones as easy as Arch. ABS is a real framework, all you have to do is run 'abs' in your terminal and you'll pull in all the PKGBUILDs, patches etc. necessary for rebuilding every single package in the Arch repositories.
Ubuntu:
$ apt-get build-dep $package  // builds dependencies of package
$ apt-get source $package     // get source of any package in repositories
$ checkinstall                // create .deb from source directory

makepkg -is

Arch outsimples by 3:1

Last edited by fukawi2 (2010-09-07 23:14:28)

sand_man · 2010-09-07 23:19:44

fukawi2 wrote:

litemotiv wrote:
.:B:. wrote:
I have never seen a Linux distro make compiling your own packages instead of using the stock binary ones as easy as Arch. ABS is a real framework, all you have to do is run 'abs' in your terminal and you'll pull in all the PKGBUILDs, patches etc. necessary for rebuilding every single package in the Arch repositories.
Ubuntu:
$ apt-get build-dep $package  // builds dependencies of package
$ apt-get source $package     // get source of any package in repositories
$ checkinstall                // create .deb from source directory
makepkg -is
Arch outsimples by 3:1

Well technically it would be more like this.

sudo abs
cd /var/abs/$repo/$pkgname
makepkg -is

Skripka · 2010-09-07 23:31:30

*delete*

Last edited by Skripka (2010-09-07 23:32:10)

Arch Linux

#1 2010-09-07 08:03:36

Arch vs BSD

#2 2010-09-07 10:31:55

Re: Arch vs BSD

#3 2010-09-07 13:41:42

Re: Arch vs BSD

#4 2010-09-07 13:52:49

Re: Arch vs BSD

#5 2010-09-07 16:13:59

Re: Arch vs BSD

#6 2010-09-07 20:23:18

Re: Arch vs BSD

#7 2010-09-07 21:37:29

Re: Arch vs BSD

#8 2010-09-07 21:44:58

Re: Arch vs BSD

#9 2010-09-07 22:09:17

Re: Arch vs BSD

#10 2010-09-07 22:12:40

Re: Arch vs BSD

#11 2010-09-07 22:31:10

Re: Arch vs BSD

#12 2010-09-07 22:41:52

Re: Arch vs BSD

#13 2010-09-07 23:14:06

Re: Arch vs BSD

#14 2010-09-07 23:19:44

Re: Arch vs BSD

#15 2010-09-07 23:31:30

Re: Arch vs BSD

Board footer