Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 06:46:34 -0600 (CST) From: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> To: 01031149@3web.net Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: WTF!! Building from source Message-ID: <14850.45994.573623.608136@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <117465501@toto.iv>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
01031149@3web.net types: > > Someone types: > > > On 1 Nov 00 at 5:27, Mike Meyer wrote: > > > > leoric@home.com types: > > > > > I have read things from the FreeBSD webpage, archived mailing list > > > > > posts, and /usr/src/UPDATING. The proper way to build world and build > > > > > a kernel from source is different in each of these. > > > <snip> > > > > Be warned that some of the things that can be set in /etc/make.conf can > > > > cause the method with config to break, and some can cause the system to > > > > be unbootable until the intallworld is done. > > > In light of another current thread on this list, "beginners with bsd" and > > > the various recommendations therein, it would seem that your above warning > > > points to a FBSD deficiency that would absolutely and totally collapse a > > > computer and/or FBSD newbie's experience with same. What would you see as > > > necessary changes to FBSD to preclude such an experience/event and perhaps > > > cast FBSD in something other than a "not-for-the-faint-hearted" OS and > > > still retain *all* the flexibility that *nix "power-users" require/demand? > > No, because problems with /etc/make.conf mean you're *way* beyond the > > "beginners with bsd" stage. You're building the system (or at least > > ports) from sources, which is something that MS sort of assumes that > > you'll never do. Beginners should make sure they can get around a > > -RELEASE system before rebuilding the system from sources. Being able > > to build ports at the very least. They should make sure they can > > rebuild the system from sources before they start monkeying around > > with make.conf (if you don't touch it, things won't break). > I totally agree with the above. However, your advise above is not obvious > in any of the FBSD docs that I've read. Problem is though, even a FBSD > newbie may want sound or some other goodies that are not included in > GENERIC. My point was that compiling a custom kernel would not be that bad > where it not for the "booby trap(s)" that you warned about in your previous > message. Actually, sound may be in the 4.2 GENERIC. This conversation caused me to suggest putting pcm in to jkh, and he agreed. Are there other things that people tend to rebuild GENERIC fairly early? Sound is the one that shows up in -questions a lot. SMP is liable to be another in the future. > I probably did not explain my point adequately in my post. It sure was not > to run down FBSD -- hell I *have* to use win9x and I hate it. As a matter > of fact, In the interim (until I graduate full-time to FBSD) I'm DOSifying > as much as I can. My point *was* between the lines ;) When I first > installed 3.3R a year or so ago, I popped off on this list stating that I > could not believe that such a complement of unbelievably intelligent folks > as the ones responsible for FBSD, could not at *least* create a battery of > shell scripts to ease the customization burden *after* a GENERIC install. > Something like the script that installs and configures mgetty. An awful > lot of folks agreed with me, because a newbie doesn't know his ass from a > hole in the ground when it comes to *anything* about Unix. An analogy > could be a proud owner of a brand new high-performance Ferrari. Most of > theses owners are not savvy enough to get under the hood to tinker and > tweak yet they truely want and enjoy driving it. Can you be more specific? FreeBSD has already added a lot of tools for such when compared with 4.4BSD, though many are hidden in sysinstall. I.e. - there's a GUI interface for configuring the network that feels identical to what Windows uses; there are tools for adding groups & users, etc. > Mike, this newbie doesn't purport to have *any* answers. I simply don't > have the savvy. However I do have various Unix frustrations, but most of > all bewilderment. You see, I must be looking at the Unix guru community > through rose-colored plassed, because I can't believe that such a talented > bunch - talent that created such a powerful OS and its myriad of add-ons > and utilities, should be stumbling with the creation of comprehensive > installation scripts. I just can't see it. Maybe I can -- for IMHO, Unix > was once the domain of the elite in the computer community. There simply > was never a *need* for automation etc. Now that the "proletariat" have > come knocking and wanting to use, one of two mind-sets will prevail: > 1. This is the Unix way -adapt or get out > 2. let's provide the Unix-way *and* at least a completely automated GENERIC > install. There are two problems with this. One is that people who've been working decades with Unix don't see the world the same way others do. What may seem perfectly reasonable and obvious to them is incredibly convoluted to others. They are, if anything, disqualified to do UI design for the rest of the world. The second thing is that FreeBSD is still (mostly) a volunteer effort. This means people tend to fix things that they need to fix, not what most of the rest of the world needs to fix. > Linux seems to have adopted - to some degree- the latter. They are > enjoying a modicum of success. Why not FBSD--to an even greater degree? I > know that I've over-simplified a lot of issues - which you have gone > expanded on in your previous post.and I thank you! I guess all of this is > frustration and *not* a denegration of FBSD per se. Thanks for listening.. Well, the Linux system has enough commercial $'s behind it that more than one group has spent money on *advertising*, of all things. That means they can do things like *pay* someone who sees things from the new user point of view to design the installation/configuration system - and if necessary to implement it. I notice that the different Linux distributions tend to use different tools for installation, though enough use Linuxconf (or whatever it's called) for maintenance that crackers probe for it's system port. Most of the Linux distribution systems I've looked at aren't acceptable for FreeBSD, because they won't work over a serial line (which is a requirement for FreeBSD). The configuration problem - and some of the install difficulties, and the problems with the package system - are a recognized problem. They're also interrelated, and there's a requirements list <URL: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~alex/libh/ > and some people working on them - slowly. If you really want to contribute *code* to the FreeBSD project that would help with this area, that page has directions on how to do so. <mike To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?14850.45994.573623.608136>