source code, binaries and...ports?

[rabbitweed]

Ok, so my understand is this;

source code is written in a "high level language", which needs a compiler to translate it to 0s and 1s that the computer can read.

binaries are precompiled source codes, optimised for different distributions.

ports are...what the fuck are ports? and portage? I have read explinations but they still make no sense as they are aimed at more advanced users than me.

[oddballz194]

A port is a version of a program which has been modified and compiled to run on a different system than the one it was written on. For example, a program for x86 Linux can be ported to Mac OS X -- it gets modified and compiled for that other platform.

Note that changing from x86 Linux to Sparc Linux would also be a port, because they have different CPUs.

IIRC, Portage is one specific distro's system to compile your software specifically for the hardware you have installed, for performance, rather than distributing more generic binary versions.

[Prometheum]

Binaries aren't optimized for distros, they're optimized for CPU architectures and instruction sets.

What oddballz said is one definition of "port(s)", but they can also mean something to the effect of packages -- anything that you install, like a program, a library, or documentation.

[rabbitweed]

Originally Posted by oddballz194

A port is a version of a program which has been modified and compiled to run on a different system than the one it was written on. For example, a program for x86 Linux can be ported to Mac OS X -- it gets modified and compiled for that other platform.

So FreeBSD ports are apps that usually run on linux but have been modified to run on FreeBSD?

[rabbitweed]

Originally Posted by Prometheum

Binaries aren't optimized for distros, they're optimized for CPU architectures and instruction sets.

Then why do so many distros maintain their own binaries?

Does it not really matter what binary you use? rpms seem to work fine on debian based distros, IME.

[Prometheum]

Originally Posted by rabbitweed

So FreeBSD ports are apps that usually run on linux but have been modified to run on FreeBSD?

No, like I said, in FreeBSD terminology, "port" means "package".

Originally Posted by rabbitweed

Then why do so many distros maintain their own binaries?

Does it not really matter what binary you use? rpms seem to work fine on debian based distros, IME.

They maintain their own packages, not their own binaries. The binaries are probably compiled with roughly similar settings, and yes, you can run RPM's on Debian as long as the architecture matches.

Distros maintain their own packages because it allows for centralization of things known to work for that distro, but also for other reasons. For instance, Ubuntu takes most of its packages from Debian, but it will modifiy some or patch them because Ubuntu isn't as hell-bent on stability. BLAG and GnewSense modify Fedora and Ubuntu packages (respectively) to optimize for Freedom.

[oddballz194]

Originally Posted by Prometheum

No, like I said, in FreeBSD terminology, "port" means "package".

Now it does, yes, but originally even in BSD it referred to porting software from the main AT&T distribution of Unix so that it would run on the BSD system. It was therefore a set of software source code and the patches that would allow relatively smooth compilation on the new system.

[Prometheum]

Originally Posted by oddballz194

Now it does, yes, but originally even in BSD it referred to porting software from the main AT&T distribution of Unix so that it would run on the BSD system. It was therefore a set of software source code and the patches that would allow relatively smooth compilation on the new system.

Huh, didn't know that. Cool.

[rabbitweed]

Originally Posted by Prometheum

They maintain their own packages, not their own binaries. The binaries are probably compiled with roughly similar settings, and yes, you can run RPM's on Debian as long as the architecture matches.

So what's the difference between a binary and a package?

And if FreeBSD ports are just packages, why does everyone go on about how clever gentoo's portage is and how similar it is to BSD?

[Prometheum]

Originally Posted by rabbitweed

So what's the difference between a binary and a package?

And if FreeBSD ports are just packages, why does everyone go on about how clever gentoo's portage is and how similar it is to BSD?

A binary is just a compiled piece of code. Several binaries can make up one program. A package isn't necessarily binary or even a program -- packages can be source files, documentation, images, etc.

FreeBSD ports are just names of programs that are in their ports tree (I don't think the FreeBSD ports tree includes non-program-related data, the documentation is along with the program IIRC). Gentoo has a similar system to FreeBSD because they have a source-based system where the programs are compiled on your machine, and the system is structured similarly to a BSD ports tree.

An example: A program, when installed on Debian, might actually install three packages: the program itself, (foo), the program's library (libfoo), and the programs documentation (foo-doc). On FreeBSD, you could install that by going into the ports tree and typing ``make install'' in the port's directory (cd /usr/ports/sys-apps/foo && make install). This would pull in the library as a dependancy (the same as if you did ``cd /usr/ports/sys-libs/libfoo && make install) and will also download the documentation. On Gentoo, you'd use portage to install the program (emerge foo), it will pull in the library as a dependancy (the same as if you did emerge libfoo) and also download the documentation.

Ultimately, the program gets installed. The key difference is that on BSD and Gentoo, the program is compiled on your own system, allowing it to be tuned to your paticluar CPU.