From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Mar 24 18:05:33 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id SAA27830 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 24 Mar 1995 18:05:33 -0800 Received: from gateway.cybernet.com (gateway.cybernet.com [192.245.33.1]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id SAA27812 for ; Fri, 24 Mar 1995 18:04:39 -0800 Received: from [192.245.33.12] by gateway.cybernet.com (8.6.8/1.0A) id VAA18447; Fri, 24 Mar 1995 21:30:21 -0500 X-Sender: mtaylor@gateway.cybernet.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 24 Mar 1995 21:05:03 -0500 To: hackers@FreeBSD.org From: mtaylor@gateway.cybernet.com (Mark J. Taylor) Subject: Re: httpd as part of the system. Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Terry writes: > >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? At least during "main install," yes. > >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? What about upgrades of already-installed packages? Or if the sysadmin lost/deleted the /var/db/pkg directory? Systems crash sometimes, and things get lost (but not FreeBSD, of course ;) How can you be *sure* that a piece is installed or not? > >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. The sysadmin should be able to install any of the available packages at any time- not just during "main install." It would be bogus to require a complete installation of the entire system if he/she forgot to include a package/port/whatever_you_pc_name_for_a_port_is. Question: Should there be the concept of meta-packages? Ones which are just a collection of other packages, that is. If this was done, then there could be the 'super network' meta pack, and the 'security' meta pack, etc. Or should there just be some sort of menu listing each package individually, and let the sysadmin select them out? How about a combination of the two, where the contents of the meta-package are displayed, and the sysadmin has the option to install anything/everything in the group? Does anyone actually like the 'inst' installer used by SGI? Maybe that would be a good format to start with. (Personally, I think it serves its purpose, but it is time consuming and butt-ugly. How many 'more's do you have to do to make sure you've got it right?) I'll go spouting my mouth off somewhere else now... -Mark Taylor mtaylor@cybernet.com