#26012 closed enhancement (worksforme)
Any reason why not to supply binary packages instead of source?
| Reported by: | paulbeard@… | Owned by: | macports-tickets@… |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | Normal | Milestone: | |
| Component: | base | Version: | 1.9.1 |
| Keywords: | Cc: | hsivank@…, JensErikWeber@… | |
| Port: |
Description
Given that OS X's release cycle is longer than a year, usually 18 months or so, major upgrades (kernel/library) are not much more frequent, and the hardware is standardized to a degree Windows/Linux/*BSD developers could only dream of, is there any reason not to make binary packages available as the Linux/*BSD projects do?
Could one not simply port destroot a port and allow the output of that to be downloaded and installed? Some of us are on physically limited hardware and build cycles can take days on some ports. For those who want to, make source available, maybe even distribute it with the package, but most of us would find it helpful to simply install a package instead of building it.
Change History (4)
comment:1 Changed 14 years ago by hsivank@…
| Cc: | hsivank@… added |
|---|
comment:3 Changed 14 years ago by jmroot (Joshua Root)
| Resolution: | → worksforme |
|---|---|
| Status: | new → closed |
Enable archive mode and set ARCHIVE_SITE_LOCAL in the environment to a site that has archives available.
As to why there isn't an "official" archive site, FAQ.
comment:4 Changed 14 years ago by paulbeard@…
But since there isn't an official repository and I don't see any unofficial ones in my initial search, this is a feature that doesn't actually work. It can be checked off the punchlist but can't actually be used. Awesome.
Hard to believe setting this up is all that difficult, even w/o any kind of authentication/verification beyond what's in MacPorts (distfile checksums).
Cc Me!