Any reason not to use ports installs?

IT_Architect

Verified User
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
888
Any good reason not to use port installs?

I have two documents, one using the standard install and one that migrates everything to ports. Both explain the reason behind the individual choices. Both begin with the operating system install and continue through adding all the common requirements such as CLAMAV, tuning of Apache, and MySQL etc. Both work equally well.

The common install procedure describes the install, trouble spots, and the fix-ups necessary.

The ports install procedure enables anyone to migrate all of their services to ports by simply copying and pasting from the document to a terminal window. The procedures were developed and documented by members of the community. I only have one service not using ports, and that will be rectified shortly.

It's wonderful to be able to use the standard ports facilities to keep track of what needs to be updated and be able to use standard documentation and "How To" procedures published around the web to enhance and extend the services and install other software.

From time-to-time we will want to update DirectAdmin itself on our servers. For those of you who understand better than I what happens during a DirectAdmin install and update, perhaps you could outline the best choices to make when using ports.
 
Last edited:

interfasys

Verified User
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
2,099
Location
Switzerland
I would be interested in knowing as well.
To use ports seems sensible, but only if it doesn't break anything and if there is an easy way to go back to using custombuild
 
Top