From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Oct 30 18:30:28 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA27366 for freebsd-advocacy-outgoing; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 18:30:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from Loki.orland.u91.k12.me.us (Loki.orland.u91.k12.me.us [169.244.111.67]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA27351 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 18:30:15 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from netmonger@genesis.ispace.com) Received: from Celeris (56k-port4014.ime.net [209.90.195.24]) by Loki.orland.u91.k12.me.us (8.9.1/8.8.8-Loki) with SMTP id VAA06150; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 21:27:48 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from netmonger@genesis.ispace.com) X-Server-ID: Loki.orland.u91.k12.me.us, OCSNet - Orland Maine USA X-Coord-Name: Drew "Droobie" Baxter, OneNetwork Exchange X-Coord-Addr: Droobie@Openlink.orland.me.us X-Coord-Pager: USA: 207-471-2719, http://pagedroo.orland.me.us Message-Id: <4.1.19981030212143.00a84420@genesis.ispace.com> X-Sender: netmonger@genesis.ispace.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 21:22:18 -0500 To: Greg Lehey , Terry Lambert , jcwells@u.washington.edu From: Drew Baxter Subject: Re: FreeBSD certified software (was: WordPerfect 8 for Linux) Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <19981031124827.F5846@freebie.lemis.com> References: <199810302253.PAA10713@usr05.primenet.com> <199810302253.PAA10713@usr05.primenet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 12:48 PM 10/31/98 +1030, Greg Lehey wrote: >On Friday, 30 October 1998 at 22:53:12 +0000, Terry Lambert wrote: >>>> StarOffice on CD is probably not easy to install on FreeBSD; it's the >>>> port that does that. If a port exists, and the manufacturer distributes >>>> the package on his CD-ROM, then we should give him extra credit for >>>> that, even if it's not a native FreeBSD port. >>> >>> Absolutely. This would fall under "Designed for". >>> >>> The communcation hangup here is in the definition of "native". Perhaps a >>> vendor builds a FreeBSD software product. Maybe the vendor knows nothing >>> of "FreeBSD Ports(tm)". I would still call this a "native port" because it >>> was explicitly made to run on FreeBSD without emulation. The vendor gets >>> the extra recognition. >> >> I would like to see three categories: >> >> o Can be made to run with effort >> o Install tools, but non-native binaries >> o Native binaries. > >You're late on the scene, Terry. This is exactly what I suggested >several days ago. > >I think that others have made a valid point, though: if we include the >first category, we don't give much incentive for them to take the >relatively small step to the second category. I think we should refer >to the first category in an also-ran web page, but not issue >certificates unless they go at least to the second category. > >Greg That makes sense. It's not like it's going to kill anyone to throw together some install tools. After all, it's a good plug for their product as well to have support for FreeBSD.. --- Drew "Droobie" Baxter Network Admin/Professional Computer Nerd(TM) OneEX: The OneNetwork Exchange 207-942-0275 http://www.droo.orland.me.us My Latest Kernel: FreeBSD 3.0-CURRENT (ONEEX) #14: Mon Oct 19 22:36:58 EDT 1998 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message