Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
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>