From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 21 21:44:34 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 357D3106566B for ; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 21:44:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mx21.fluidhosting.com [204.14.89.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C71A98FC12 for ; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 21:44:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 21230 invoked by uid 399); 21 Sep 2009 21:17:51 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO foreign.dougb.net) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with ESMTPAM; 21 Sep 2009 21:17:51 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-Sender: dougb@dougbarton.us Message-ID: <4AB7ED76.5010406@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 14:17:42 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090822) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ed Schouten References: <20090921112657.GW95398@hoeg.nl> In-Reply-To: <20090921112657.GW95398@hoeg.nl> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 OpenPGP: id=D5B2F0FB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org, current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: tmux(1) in base X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 21:44:34 -0000 I hate to sound negative, but I really don't find arguments of the sort, "the first thing I install on a new system is 'foo', so 'foo' should be part of the base" compelling.[1] I, like a lot of other FreeBSD users have never used screen or tmux, and probably never will. For my money nohup works just fine for long-lived processes that need a log. But even the "I don't use it so it shouldn't be there" argument is not particularly persuasive. We need to take a hard look at what kind of system we want to have. It's a lot easier to keep userland utilities like tmux up to date from the ports tree than it is in the base. That alone should be the deciding factor, but if you want to hear a chorus of the "bloat" argument then fill it in here. Rather than going down the road of putting everything that some subset of our developer base thinks makes a system "usable" into the base I would like to suggest that the effort be spent on improving the installation tools such that making a system "usable" out of the box is a matter of ticking off a few boxes at install time. That change will benefit a whole lot more users than installing one more userland tool into the base. Doug [1] If we're going to go that route then I'm installing bash. -- This .signature sanitized for your protection