Date: Fri, 24 Mar 95 16:26:37 MST From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) To: jkh@freefall.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Cc: hackers@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: httpd as part of the system. Message-ID: <9503242326.AA12251@cs.weber.edu> In-Reply-To: <24352.796086769@freefall.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Mar 24, 95 03:12:49 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Ok, point well taken. I guess it's more of an ass-saving issue then > though since we can always enjoin users who haven't loaded some > component that they should do so when or if they complain about > missing functionality. For some reason, the ports collection is still > preceived by many as not "plug and play" enough and people don't react > well to suggestions that they failed to load some port or another in > response to a complaint. Perhaps a political renaming of ports is in order to better imply what you've said here. The main issue is one of installation tools (again). Perhaps "optional software" during the main install? Or the ability to rerun the main install by typing "install", but then only being given a list of uninstalled pieces that you can install? Sort of a menu for "pkgadd" that knows what packages are available that has the same look-n-feel as the install and starts when you type "install" and pretends to have installed other pieces, like "base OS" but refuses to uninstall them? Just thinking out loud... Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9503242326.AA12251>