From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Feb 10 00:23:14 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6FBC16A4CE
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 10 Feb 2005 00:23:14 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from ion.gank.org (ion.gank.org [69.55.238.164])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEBB643D2D
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 10 Feb 2005 00:23:14 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from craig@xfoil.gank.org)
Received: by ion.gank.org (mail, from userid 1001)
	id 6F78E2C211; Wed,  9 Feb 2005 18:23:14 -0600 (CST)
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 18:23:12 -0600
From: Craig Boston <craig@xfoil.gank.org>
To: "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy@veldy.net>
Message-ID: <20050210002311.GA30113@nowhere>
Mail-Followup-To: Craig Boston <craig@xfoil.gank.org>,
	"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy@veldy.net>, supraexpress@globaleyes.net,
	freebsd-current@freebsd.org
References: <20050208034855.D211E43D45@mx1.FreeBSD.org>
	<420A5969.5010705@veldy.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <420A5969.5010705@veldy.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: The case for FreeBSD
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 00:23:15 -0000

On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 12:41:45PM -0600, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> Besides, I can think of several situations where you wouldn't really
> want a GUI based installation, in particular, when building and
> configuring a server.  A GUI based installation required the detection
> [perhaps accurate might be oder] of the video hardware, which in
> general just doesn't matter on a server.

And though most i386 hardware is broken in this respect, don't forget
that in many other architectures, the video hardware may not even EXIST.

Even some high-end x86 server boards allow booting without a video card.
Think serial install on a 1U headless server with only power, network,
and serial port.

Craig