Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 19:49:22 +0100 From: Wilko Bulte <wilko@yedi.iaf.nl> To: Mark Newton <newton@internode.com.au> Cc: Thomas Runge <runge@rostock.zgdv.de>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sysinstall: is it really at the end of its lifecycle? Message-ID: <19991215194922.E447@yedi.iaf.nl> In-Reply-To: <19991215233319.B1263@internode.com.au>; from newton@internode.com.au on Wed, Dec 15, 1999 at 11:33:19PM %2B1030 References: <3856BD33.5DE1AB48@newsguy.com> <Pine.BSF.4.10.9912141705440.76991-100000@sasknow.com> <19991215105736.A467@internode.com.au> <38576264.7D33C327@rostock.zgdv.de> <19991215233319.B1263@internode.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Dec 15, 1999 at 11:33:19PM +1030, Mark Newton wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 15, 1999 at 10:41:56AM +0100, Thomas Runge wrote:
> > For mainly server-oriented, the "install source to update" or
> > console-based setups are quite enough, because the system will
> > most probably administraded by people, that know, what they are
> > doing.
>
> But is it reasonable to say, "You can't play at all if you don't
> fit that description"?
>
> (Especially since the NT server camp seems to think you can administer
> a system with zero knowledge of anything; The requirement that they
> suddenly need to become familiar with how to deal with large archives of
> source code isn't going to help us get a foot in those doors).
Whatever [CG]UI you throw at the problem at hand: there is *NO* programmer-
fixable way out from cluelessnes. What good would be a system that is
a snap to install but once it is installed it says # to you?
--
Wilko Bulte Arnhem, The Netherlands - The FreeBSD Project
WWW : http://www.tcja.nl http://www.freebsd.org
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19991215194922.E447>