From owner-freebsd-questions  Thu Aug  8 02:37:43 1996
Return-Path: owner-questions
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id CAA26247
          for questions-outgoing; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 02:37:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ime.net (ime.net [204.97.248.4])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA26240
          for <questions@freebsd.org>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 02:37:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kimiko.tcguy.net (buxton-4.ime.net [206.231.148.133]) by ime.net (8.7.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id FAA29328; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 05:36:16 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <3209B52A.203B@ime.net>
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 05:36:42 -0400
From: Gary Chrysler <tcg@ime.net>
Reply-To: tcg@ime.net
Organization: The Computer Guy
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b6 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Robert Nordier <rnordier@iafrica.com>
CC: dgy@rtd.com, fqueries@jraynard.demon.co.uk, questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: perhaps i am just stupid.
References: <199608080836.KAA00237@eac.iafrica.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Robert Nordier wrote:
> 
	<chomp>
> 
> Certainly, anything is a good deal better than nothing.  Possibly,
> though, one should err on the side of doing too much rather than
> too little.  There are an awful lot of files (~70 in the bin
> distribution) to go through by hand.
>

Yes, I agree.
Like I said earlier, Unix Guru's probably won't use it, Only the
newcomers from dos will.. Most Unix Guru's already have a Unix
box up and therefore have the tools already! Or the knowledge
on how to do it!
Like I said, I don't think I'll use it, And I'm far from a Unix
Guru. But I already have a Unix box and I'll use the tools there.

So IMHO it should be geared for those that are comming from dos
and should look/act dos.
(Add Windbloze to all the above the "Dos's" except the
 look/act one :)

> I'd tend to agree with other views that a DOS-orientated program
> is needed -- if possibly a nice shiny one that looks good -- (and
> particularly no batch files).  First impressions matter.
> 

Welp to make it look shiney pretty you either have to get pretty
fancy with the code or use obj/libs, I don't fancy the idea of
obj/libs ..
I want source!

Plain ol'text based is suffiecent<sp?> IMHO.

(Sure be nice if Netscape had a spell checker, I *really* need it)

Yea, I'm not to keen on using batch files on/for installation type
stuff! Seems lame to me!
I make some bad assumptions when I see apps that use batch files
for installation. Just kinda turns my stomach.


-Enjoy
Gary
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Improve America's Knowledge... Share yours
The Borg... Where minds meet
(207) 929-3848