From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Sep 25 18:41:35 1995 Return-Path: owner-chat Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id SAA03498 for chat-outgoing; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 18:41:35 -0700 Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id SAA03483 for ; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 18:41:27 -0700 Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id SAA06487; Mon, 25 Sep 1995 18:38:20 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199509260138.SAA06487@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: ports startup scripts To: nate@rocky.sri.MT.net (Nate Williams) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 18:38:20 -0700 (MST) Cc: terry@lambert.org, nate@rocky.sri.MT.net, kelly@fsl.noaa.gov, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199509260055.SAA12300@rocky.sri.MT.net> from "Nate Williams" at Sep 25, 95 06:55:35 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 720 Sender: owner-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk > Huh? What does the init stuff have to do with the desktop? Sean is > arguing that by adding the extra complexity to init you aren't buying > anything for the normal user. His arguement is backed by the fact that > the average user is competent b/c Unix lost/doesn't have/never > had/couldn't have/would like to have but didn't stand a chance on the > desktop. :) The argument relies on the fact that a normal user doesn't use the administrative utilities, but edits the files instead. An easy argument to make, with no administrative utilities present, but not a valid one. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.