Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:42:44 +0300 (EEST) From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org> To: DK <asdzxc111@yahoo.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BigApache for Windows - Why doesn't BSD have an installerpackage like this ??? Message-ID: <20040728155525.S12001@orion> In-Reply-To: <20040728112715.47686.qmail@web41003.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20040728095027.GA84071@orion.daedalusnetworks.priv> <20040728112715.47686.qmail@web41003.mail.yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2004-07-28 04:27, DK <asdzxc111@yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org> wrote:
> > All of these are available on FreeBSD too (except Mercury Mailserver,
> > which is just another Win32 MTA that I don't know about but somehow feel
> > reluctant to trust more than my Sendmail or Postfix installations).
>
> Yes, but not as ONE nice Package:
> eg: FreeBSD PORTS
> apache+mod_perl-1.3.31
> apache+mod_ssl+ipv6-1.3.31+2.8.18_4
>
> I tried to install apache+mod_ssl+ipv6-1.3.31+2.8.18_4 THEN
> apache+mod_perl-1.3.31 and its messed up!!
I can understand why building things from source in a new, previously
unknown, system might be a source of frustration and anger. Don't let
the fact that FreeBSD is *different* from what you were used to working
with until now confuse and anger you.
Some times, it's better to install smaller packages that work together
in a well-known way, than huge mega-monsters that break in unexpected
ways later on. I'm sure that, even on Windows, you've used small
packages that do one thing and do it correctly. The most popular IRC
client on Windows is mIRC, which installs and runs in a breeze without
having a ton of "modules" and other install-time knobs that user will
tweak at their pleasure. Would you call mIRC a messed up installer?
Anyway, just to check that I'm not writing junk, I've just installed
apache with mod_ssl, ipv6 and mode_perl support.
The process of installation is relatively straightforward, but you
didn't provide any details on how or why "it messed up" so I'm going to
describe what I did and you're welcome to try the installation one more
time if that helps at all.
I used the www/apache13-modssl+ipv6 port to install Apache, then
www/mod_perl to install mod_perl version 1.x (which could be
substituted in a breeze with www/mod_perl2 to use the newer
version) tweaked Apache's config file a bit and voila... my web server
was up and running in less than 5 minutes.
Did you actually *try* to install Apache using the ports? You still
didn't answer my question in an earlier post about the problems you seem
to be having:
Why isn't it easy for you to install all these things on FreeBSD?
Which part of the installation troubles you? A recent addition to
the Handbook was a section on Apache. Perhaps, by letting us know
what gives you trouble we can improve the documentation to help you
and anyone else that tries to install an Apache web server from
now on.
> If you want people(Windows user) using BSD on mass for servers etc,
> develop a Package that contains many of the necessary Apache modules:
> eg: ONE Package (NOT an array of messy Ports)
>
> ESSENTIAL:
> Apache
> MySQL
> mod_ssl(Contains:OpenSSL)
> mod_perl
> PHP
Note that OpenSSL is part of the base system in FreeBSD. Unlike
Windows, where in the best case it's considered an "add-on" that you have
to add later. You don't need to add anything to your FreeBSD system to
have OpenSSL support, provided you keep the system itself relatively up
to date, using the recommended update instructions of the Handbook or
the file /usr/src/UPDATING.
> OPTIONAL:
> IMAP
> mod_python
> mod_auth_nds
> mod_auth_mysql
> mod_fastcgi
> mod_jk
> XML
> GD
Exactly what we have now. You can use the Ports to install all of the
above and a lot more. There are more than 10,000 ports in the FreeBSD
collection now; a number that is far larger than anything Microsoft
Windows can boast about for programs that are tightly integrated to its
system, are available for any version of Windows and work mostly out of
the box with minimal changes *if* any are needed at all.
On 2004-07-28 04:27, DK <asdzxc111@yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org> wrote:
> > Why isn't it easy for you to install all these things on FreeBSD?
> >
> > Which part of the installation troubles you? A recent addition to the
> > Handbook was a section on Apache. Perhaps, by letting us know what
> > gives you trouble we can improve the documentation to help you and
> > anyone else that tries to install an Apache web server from now on.
>
> Being a long time Windows 2000 user & a coder in C, C++, Assembler,
> Perl, PHP I am making a real effort to set up a Web Server on the
> FreeBSD platform.
>
> I can install apache OK. Installing other modules(mod_perl, mod_ssl,
> php etc...) with it is a nightmare...
You're a coder. At least you claim to be one, and I have no reason to
doubt it, if you feel so.
If the FreeBSD ports don't meet your special requirements, because their
limitations block you from doing things the way you like them done, you
can always download the source of Apache, mod_perl, mod_ssl, php or any
other programs you wish to install and follow the build instructions
contained therein.
It doesn't *have* to be a nightmare.
When you don't know how to do something, this list is the place to ask.
> What I have noticed so far about FreeBSD:
>
> FreeBSD is about 5 YEARS behind windows (I would actually say 1990,
> but people my have heart attacks) - apologies to all the hard work put
> in by BSD contributors!
Over-generalizations are not helping you find out why FreeBSD does
things differently. They don't help us assist you with the problems
you're having because you still haven't mentioned what the exact nature
of those problems was.
Please, spare us the apologies and the insults too :-/
> - with FreeBSD & Windows 2000 installed on the SAME computer, the GUI
> of Windows 2000 is MUCH faster than any of the BSD window
> managers
That's in vivid contrast to the general feeling of "speed" that
thousands of FreeBSD users have reported so far.
> (wmaker, FVWM, blackbox, fluxbox, XFCE(STILL can't start this
> from exec, whats the damn command startxfce4 ??? this doesn't
> work!)...
Actually, fvwm2 can be shown to have a very small memory footprint and
still a usable look that doesn't lack some of the nice features of
Windows 9x. I've even seen themes of fvwm2 that resemble and mimic the
Windows XP look without requiring 128 MB of system memory just to get
started. I'm not sure why you claim that Windows is faster/lighter but
if you do have raw numbers to back your claim up I'd be interested to
see them.
I've been using windowmaker and fvwm2 for more than 8 years now and I
can tell you that their configurability is almost unsurpassed, their
look can be tweaked and changed to resemble almost anything and their
speed is so good that I can no longer work on Windows machines without
feeling I'm being constantly slowed down by the system's GUI flaws.
> I won't even comment on the shitty performance of KDE & GNOME
> - If people say it should be used without a GUI... they must be over
> 40, bald, lonely & most love shitty VI - I can EDIT any file faster on
> a GUI editor then any coder I have seen at UNI/WORK who say VI is
> better...
One of my friends installed KDE for the first time last year, after
having worked with Windows for a long time. He's 20, has a flock of
hair that's wilder than I could ever imagine hair can be, very social,
full of energy, liveliness and vigor, and he doesn't really like VI but
has become a great Emacs fan in a weekend's time.
Of course, anecdotal evidence is not going to convince you that you
might be reacting in an angry way and missing important details, but
as I've often repeated in cases like this one:
Be patient! Nobody learns how to install, configure, use & hack a new
system in an afternoon's time (unless their name is Linus, they live in
Finland and the winter has been raging on outside for months).
> - No default GUI File Explorer (excluding KDE/GNOME, not that there's
> is usable) - had to install xfe on wmaker(still about as useless as
> Windows 3.1 File Manager)
That's because you're still bound to old habits. I have no use for
slow, GUI monsters that require me to point and click for every little
detail of what I want to do.
For those that do, there's always x11-fm/tkdesk which is an excellent
file manager, in my opinion. It even resembles Windows Commander for
those of you, Windows users, who have kept the good tradition of Norton
Commander and haven't been dragged in the hell of whatever Microsoft
wants to sell today as the New Cool Explorer Style(TM) :-P
When you do spend some time with FreeBSD though and try to learn some of
the commands available to the command line user, you might be surprised
at the power that is hidden under the hood in any *real* UNIX system.
But let's leave this for the future to show.
> - FreeBSD does NOT Default Mount my CD & Floppy(this is ridiculous -
> even MS DOS NOT to mention Windows 3.1 [Year 1990... ring a bell] did
> this!!)
There is a reason why it's not enabled by default, but if you really,
absolutely *MUST* enable it, it's described in the documentation. You
could always search for it yourself or ask on this list for details,
pointers and/or help with your setup.
> - you honestly expect new users to edit configuration files so
> it automounts ?? ... instead of having stuff in the man/manual/docs
> about mounting/unmounting, just automount them as DEFAULT... no need
> to read the docs... logical ???
No. Why would it be logical? It *is* different, as I've said, but this
doesn't make it more logical than the FreeBSD way.
The philosophy of Windows that you've come from is "enable everything
and let the poor bugger chase the bugs of all the things that he's
running later". The philosophy of UNIX systems has (usually) been "let
the administrator of the system control *exactly* what he runs and how".
By enabling everything in FreeBSD we'd be succumbing to the same sort of
distorted philosophy that has brought Windows to its current state, with
trojans, viruses, hacks, spyware, adware and anything else you can think
of being able to exploit unknown parts of your system to wreak all sorts
of havoc behind your back.
That's not something we like. If you do like this sort of thing, then
you can always enable everything on your workstations :-)
> - 300 Million Users of Windows thinks so ;)) (BTW: I am NOT including
> KDE/GNOME)
Honestly, I'd be very curious to see where you got that number from.
> - No default Find Files GUI - I won't even comment on lack of
> functionality of Cmd line whereis/search/find
Oh, but there *is* such functionality. You just didn't look hard enough
to find it (sic). The command for searching your disk is, very
unsurprisingly, called "find". Read its manual page with:
man find
and if you still have problems using it, I'll be glad to help.
> I can tell you that 95% of people who use computers want "EASE of USE"
> - This INCLUDES easy installation of the Operating System
The FreeBSD Handbook is linked from the documentation pages of FreeBSD
at `http://www.FreeBSD.org/docs.html'. One of the first things
described in the Handbook, in great detail, including screenshots that
will assist you during the installation.
Did you try reading the "installation" chapter of the Handbook? Did you
look for any other sort of documentation that would help you get started
with FreeBSD?
> - This should INCLUDE a default setup that HAS: a Default FAST
> GUI/File Manager/Find Files/Editor .. this is all that is needed to
> get a user up & going to installing & configuring the OS to thier
> tastes ... did I forget to mention as default AUTOMOUNT !!
It's easy to install fully functional, complete desktops like KDE or
GNOME from the installation CD-ROMs. Refer to the installation
instructions on your CD-ROM disk (there should be a file called
INSTALL.TXT with a lot of help about the installation itself) or to the
online documentation I mentioned earlier for details.
> I cannot tell you the shock & disappointment I had in finding out that
> Windows 2000 runs FASTER than FreeBSD with any GUI/Windows
> Manager/Desktop Environment ... :(((
I don't really think so, but you're entitled to your own, personal
opinion. Since you're not mentioning why you think that this is so,
I'll have to answer with just a simple phrase: "not really".
> ...damn I have gone way off track here... sorry for the ranting
> people... but after 6 days straight of messing around trying to
> install Apache/MySQL/Mod_Perl/Mod_SSL/PHP.. I am a little tired...
It is obvious that you're tired, angry and totally pissed off.
Take your time. Relax a bit, and start over.
This time, please, read the installation instructions carefully. Try to
understand what is being said, and if you don't ask. Send mail to this
list with your questions and I'll be one of the first to answer.
Remember, though, that FreeBSD is a *different* system from the Windows
you've been used until now. There might be things that you have learned
to do in one way with Windows but have to be unlearned or adjusted to
make the best out of your FreeBSD experience.
I hope you have better luck the second time you try :-)
> 3 days of that was trying to get a basic GUI/File Manager/Find
> Files/Editor working
I'll repeat just once more and then stop talking:
Whenever you face problems like this one, that seem impossibly difficult
for a FreeBSD newcomer, don't hesitate to ask.
There are no stupid questions. There are, however, many knowledgeable
and helpful people on this list.
Regards,
Giorgos
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040728155525.S12001>