Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 05:25:09 +0100 From: Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@online.fr> To: "Jason C. Wells" <jcw@highperformance.net> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The beastie boot menu. Message-ID: <1101788709.41abf62519b57@imp2-q.free.fr> In-Reply-To: <FA1860B97FADCA625C68119A@[192.168.1.16]> References: <20041129024602.GA23324@turingmachine.mentalsiege.net> <1101748454.41ab58e61eb88@imp2-q.free.fr> <FA1860B97FADCA625C68119A@[192.168.1.16]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting "Jason C. Wells" <jcw@highperformance.net>: > Of the things I read about > Dragonfly, user friendliness is not one of the things I recall as being a > design goal. It is, very much so. But not immediately. A lot of fundamental infrastructure (VFS in particular) is changing first. My problem isn't that user-friendliness isn't a design goal for FreeBSD: it is that a large and influential section of the FreeBSD community is actively hostile to user-friendliness, usually on the grounds that "this is the traditional BSD way". The csh/tcsh battle was won by the user-friendliness argument, but that was an exception, and even that bikeshed continues to pop up several years after the fact. Another example is packaging of the base system. This does not mean turning BSD into Red Hat, it means being able more easily to remove optional components, and having less junk (like stale header files) lying around after an installworld. People have posted patches on FreeBSD lists to register parts of the world in the pkg database, but there's no chance of it becoming mainstream. Rahul
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1101788709.41abf62519b57>