From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Mar 24 20:30:21 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id UAA00990 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 24 Mar 1995 20:30:21 -0800 Received: from catfish.dataplex.net ([199.183.109.243]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id UAA00984 for ; Fri, 24 Mar 1995 20:30:17 -0800 Received: from [199.183.109.242] (cod [199.183.109.242]) by catfish.dataplex.net (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id WAA23969; Fri, 24 Mar 1995 22:30:15 -0600 X-Sender: wacky@shark.dataplex.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 24 Mar 1995 22:30:16 -0600 To: hackers@freefall.cdrom.com From: rkw@dataplex.net (Richard Wackerbarth) Subject: Re: httpd as part of the system. Cc: "Andrey A. Chernov, Black Mage" Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk "Andrey A. Chernov, Black Mage" writes: >I have some experience in talking with users too (not especially >about FreeBSD) and think, that installation must be MAXIMAL. >All third-party working stuff must be in distribution, >independent of generally needed or not. Users becames very >happy in this case. I think, we need to write /usr/local/bin/* >and all X stuff to base distribution too. > >Those system admins who don't want anything can simple remove it >after install. I know one argument against it: user can't install >FreeBSD on small disk, but from real life I know, that buying >BIG disk for new OS give user less upset than missing anything >in system. Spend money to new hardware he got something which he don't >have, so he becomes more powerful, but when he miss something, >he is really sick. > >Long live Maximal Installation! This totally ignores the user that must use either a slow link or floppies to get a system up. For them, a small usable system which can be fleshed out over time is important. ---- Richard Wackerbarth rkw@dataplex.net