From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Mar 25 05:00:54 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id FAA21686 for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 25 Mar 1995 05:00:54 -0800 Received: from nietzsche (annex1s39.urc.tue.nl [131.155.12.49]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id FAA21679 for ; Sat, 25 Mar 1995 05:00:50 -0800 Received: from nietzsche (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nietzsche (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id NAA04823; Sat, 25 Mar 1995 13:18:30 +0100 Message-Id: <199503251218.NAA04823@nietzsche> X-Mailer: exmh version 1.5.3 12/28/94 To: mtaylor@gateway.cybernet.com (Mark J. Taylor) cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: httpd as part of the system. In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 24 Mar 1995 21:05:03 EST." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 25 Mar 1995 13:18:30 +0100 From: "wmbfmk@urc.tue.nl" Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > 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? > I like this idea and it can be easily accomplished by grouping the packages in directories. Marc.