Date: Sun, 30 Nov 1997 23:38:26 -0600 (CST) From: Jacques Vidrine <nectar@NECTAR.COM> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: Alex <garbanzo@hooked.net>, "hackers@freebsd.org" <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Out of Box experience (Was: Re: How is selection made of what goes into CDrom?) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971130232136.25445C-100000@kai.communique.net> In-Reply-To: <19477.880953184@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
heh heh ... This thread came out of someone Alex making a comment that KDE would be great for a graphical sysinstall: On Sun, 30 Nov 1997, Alex wrote: > <plug> > Speaking of an out of box experience, KDE works quite nicely. It's kinda > a CDE/Motif meets Win95 type thing, with a bunch of little applets for > stuff from user managment to basic text editing to games. I think this > would make a nice "X" enviroment for a graphical sysinstall. All of which > might make using FreeBSD a less daunting desktop (or even server) OS. > </plug> So I wasn't actually saying KDE shouldn't use Qt, but that FreeBSD installation utilities should not be based on any software with licensing more restrictive than the Berkeley license. Jacques Vidrine <n@nectar.com> On Sun, 30 Nov 1997, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > What? Eh? I wasn't talking about doing anything of the sort in > FreeBSD. Sysinstall in Qt certainly isn't on *my* todo list and I > doubt that it ever would be unless somebody suddenly decided that they > wanted to pay me $100,000 to do it or something :-). > > I was simply reacting to your implication (cited below) that KDE > shouldn't use it. > > Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.971130232136.25445C-100000>