From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Mar 20 15:48:05 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA03074 for freebsd-stable-outgoing; Fri, 20 Mar 1998 15:48:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from enterprise.cs.unm.edu (enterprise-atm.cs.unm.edu [198.83.90.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id PAA02978 for ; Fri, 20 Mar 1998 15:47:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from cfaehl@cs.unm.edu) Received: from avarice.cs.unm.edu [198.59.151.252] by enterprise.cs.unm.edu with esmtp (Exim 1.80 #2) id 0yGBVn-0003mB-00; Fri, 20 Mar 1998 16:47:43 -0700 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97 To: Ted Spradley cc: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: after the release ... In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 20 Mar 1998 17:02:29 CST." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 16:47:23 -0700 From: Chris Faehl Message-Id: Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk > > > Not everyone installs sources. Many of my customers have brain seizures > > if I send them step-by-step instructions on how to apply a patch and type > > 'make ; make install'. > > > > I found it easier to create a pkg and tell them to do > > > > pkg_add ftp://ftp.hilink.com.au/pub/FreeBSD/sendmail-security-pkg.tgz > > (sample URL) > > > > They were quite happy with the above. > > I'm mystified. If these people are so ignorant, why do they not prefer to type 19 characters rather than 69? Somehow they must have found out that make is a powerful programmer's tool, and pkg_add is something the all-powerful gods of computing created just to keep the uninitiated in their humble but comfortable place. The reason pkg_add is preferable is that make; make install is obtuse, and provides no clue to uninitiated admins what's going on. pkg_add, however is self-documenting - one can safely assume that it's adding a package (whatever they see a package as) and the package it's installing is (whatever they specify as a URL). make; make install is magic. The other isn't. > > Aaah, you're right. A binary patch that just replaces whole files is easy enough to create, why fight it. When something has to change in a file that's custom-configured for the site, that's a consulting fee. I think folks are missing the point here. The point is, a lot of people don't care a hoot for hacking with the OS, or learning about it. They care about getting whatever their JOB is done. Whatever tool does the bestest job for the leastest brain power is the tool that's going to get used. The OS is a means to the end, not the end itself (well, that's the theory, anyway...). > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chris Faehl | Email: cfaehl@cs.unm.edu The University of New Mexico | URL: http://www.cs.unm.edu/~cfaehl Computer Science Dept., Rm. FEC 313 | Phone: 505/277-3526 Albuquerque, NM 87131 USA | FAX: 505/277-6927 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message