Date: Sat, 7 Jan 1995 20:23:52 -0500 (EST) From: "Alex R.N. Wetmore" <aw2t+@andrew.cmu.edu> To: freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: Graphical installations and such... Message-ID: <cj3nucm00iV201zFto@andrew.cmu.edu> In-Reply-To: <199501072049.PAA05164@skynet.ctr.columbia.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Excerpts from internet.computing.freebsd-hackers: 7-Jan-95 Graphical installations and.. by Wankle Rotary Engine@sky > All this talk of trying to come up with an X/Tcl/Tk/whatever-based > installation system touches a raw nerve in me. I just want to say that I agree with pretty much everything that was said in this long message. I really think that the old netbsd/freebsd install script (the one from freebsd 1.1.5.1 and netbsd 1.0) work just fine. An added bonus is that between the boot and root disks there were enough utils to fix a trashed machine. One thing that has always bugged me about the FreeBSD install too is that it never supports doing upgrades (except maybe the 1.1 to 1.1.5.1 upgrade if there was one, which I really don't remember). Usually its just a matter of mounting the floppies and getting it to never newfs any partitions or re-disklabel my disk, but why aren't upgrade disks (like the upgr-1.0 disks from NetBSD) ever made. I really think this is a lot more important then a color graphical install. I'm sorry, but I really don't want to see the BSD camps pick up the millions of Linux users out there who don't really want to learn unix and just want to run the latest cool warez on their systems. I think its really nice that there is a community of Unix users out there who are interested in making a robust, mature, and stable system, and I really think that is what both of the BSD groups have been doing. alex
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?cj3nucm00iV201zFto>