# Sabnzbd+ package?



## dndlnx (Apr 13, 2013)

Why is there no binary for news/sabnzbdplus, the popular Usenet software? Is it restricted somehow, or depends on restricted software?

I don't see it anywhere on FTP.


----------



## rusty (Apr 13, 2013)

It's on the PC-BSD repo - http://mirrors.isc.org/pub/pcbsd/packages/9.1-RELEASE/amd64/news/

Or you could download the SABnzbd+ python source and run it as
`$ python2.7 ~/Downloads/SABnzbd-0.7.11/SABnzbd.py -d -f ~/.sabnzbd/sabnzbd.ini`


----------



## dndlnx (Apr 14, 2013)

Surely this is a mistake, then? 

Who could I notify to correct it? Or at least, maybe find out why it's ommitted.


----------



## fonz (Apr 14, 2013)

dnix said:
			
		

> Why is there no binary for news/sabnzbdplus


There _is_ a binary package for 9-STABLE, so the package for 9.1-RELEASE probably simply hasn't been built yet. After all, unless I missed it there has been no formal announcement yet that packages are available for 9.1-RELEASE.


----------



## dndlnx (Apr 14, 2013)

fonz said:
			
		

> There _is_ a binary package for 9-STABLE, so the package for 9.1-RELEASE probably simply hasn't been built yet.



This is the repo I use. I don't see anything.


----------



## kpa (Apr 14, 2013)

Not every port gets built into a package, the sheer number of different ports prevents that.


----------



## dndlnx (Apr 14, 2013)

It's not obscure software, and it's server-ish. I'd think FreeBSD would make packages for this.

Not that I'm against using ports. But I've been sticking with packages for simplicity, and don't want to mix them. I would need to switch back to all ports.


----------



## fonz (Apr 14, 2013)

dnix said:
			
		

> This is the repo I use. I don't see anything.


I checked: it's there for i386 but not amd64.



			
				dnix said:
			
		

> It's not obscure software, and it's server-ish. I'd think FreeBSD would make packages for this.


Well, it might still show up at some point. Or else you could ask. I'm not entirely certain who or what decides for which ports binary packages are built, but the freebsd-ports@ mailing list would probably be a good place to ask.



			
				dnix said:
			
		

> Not that I'm against using ports. But I've been sticking with packages for simplicity, and don't want to mix them. I would need to switch back to all ports.


For what it's worth: ports and packages can usually be mixed _to some extent_. It's when one mixes them too freely that problems tend to occur. If binary packages are available for everything else you need, then building just one port from source is unlikely to cause any problems.


----------

