Binary updates (was Re: It's not Rust, it's FreeBSD (and LLVM))

In message <202409090442.4894gGMb086473@donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net>, 
Jamie La
ndeg-Jones writes:
> void <void@f-m.fm> wrote:
>
> > ? really? All my -stable and -current machines are recompiled from source.
> > Is this really that rare?
>
> Mine too (well, I only track stable at the moment, and am only talking about 
> 8
> machines)
>
> I have too many local patches to easily do it any other way. As it is, i sync
> src, patches are automatically applied, then make buildworld etc... is all
> that's needed.
>
> Similar story for ports vs packages - too many patches (and custom options)

Those of us who build from source and build ports, whether manually or 
through our own poudriere, are the minority. Just visit the FreeBSD forums. 
I attend OpenHack here. People who do use FreeBSD use freebsd-update and 
binary packages. (I use freebsd-update and binary packages on some VMs at 
$JOB, while maintaining my own network at home as any developer does.)

And that's a marketing feature of FreeBSD. Most users don't want he hassle 
of building and installing an O/S.

And a co-worker has set up an EC2 instance (thanks cpercival@).

Out in the real world people use binary updates and binary packages. We 
developers are an anomaly these days.

Just because a few of us build from source doesn't mean the rest of the 
world does.


-- 
Cheers,
Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com>
FreeBSD UNIX:  <cy@FreeBSD.org>   Web:  https://FreeBSD.org
NTP:           <cy@nwtime.org>    Web:  https://nwtime.org

			e^(i*pi)+1=0