Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 16:47:13 +1000 From: Sue Blake <sue@welearn.com.au> To: ben@rosengart.com Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>, Darren Reed <avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 2.2.6 CD-ROM : Package dependencies up the creek ? Message-ID: <19980616164712.56903@welearn.com.au> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.96.980616013132.2930A-100000@echonyc.com>; from Snob Art Genre on Tue, Jun 16, 1998 at 01:38:41AM -0400 References: <19980616095005.64408@welearn.com.au> <Pine.GSO.3.96.980616013132.2930A-100000@echonyc.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jun 16, 1998 at 01:38:41AM -0400, Snob Art Genre wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 1998, Sue Blake wrote:
>
> > I also took objection to the idea that packages should not be available
> > during installation. That would cut out freebsd's accessibility to a lot
> > of newbies. My one concern was that it sounded like that didn't matter to
> > anyone.
>
> I don't understand why you think "newbies" can't install packages except
> in sysinstall.
Because they can't tell what's in the operating system and what's in
packages. They have to do it all at the same time or they'll think
something's missing. I'm reminded of the guy who boasted in front of his
mates "I tried FreeBSD but went back to Linux because Linux has a
command-history" :-) But there are others who we wouldn't want to lose.
> Why not put a pointer to pkg_manage in the default
> /etc/motd, or something like that? Pkg_manage even *looks* like
> sysinstall.
Gee, yes, I tried that once, had forgotten all about it.
For me, pkg_add is easier to remember.
Again, I have the same objections as above, but here's a possibility.
If, by default, the installation completed and immediately threw the user
into pkg_manage, would that give you the separation you want?
Of course people who didn't want to use it would figure out how to get
out of it, while those who couldn't distinguish between the two sections
would carry on blissfully with that next step "of the installation".
Or would you want people to fiddle around at the prompt for a while to
check a few things out? Well I wouldn't have a clue what to check out
before adding packages, and I have been using FreeBSD for a while. As it
is, you are in a position to decline the packages that are offered during
installation if you want, so you must only be referring to difficulties
for others. I don't know whether I am capable of understanding whatever
it is that concerns you, but concerns can be addressed in many ways.
There is enough flexibility already to give everyone the options they
need. No need I can see to take options away. The default behaviour
shouldn't endanger, confuse, or unnecessarily alienate anyone, and I
believe that can be achieved (if it isn't already) if we don't start
basing modifications on concepts of rewards, punishments, and paying dues.
> I still maintain that package installation is orthogonal to installation
> and belongs elsewhere -- namely, in system *configuration*, which can be
> done once the OS is safely installed.
You're probably right. In my mind, the whole thing is still
"installation". Make it do anything you like; I only want to "install"
once, though. Right after installation I want to have bash, X, lynx, an
editor that is easy to use, a few little essentials. Extra apps like
Netscape, games, perl, sendmail, I expect be able to install these later.
Oh, what's that? Games, perl and sendmail are part of the operating
system? Umm... right...
> As evidence, I submit the spate of recent complaints about sysinstall's
> handling of package installation.
I'm not up on those. Maybe they would affect my viewpoint, I can't tell.
--
Regards,
-*Sue*-
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980616164712.56903>