From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 22 17:32:43 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3323D16A4B3; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 17:32:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.volant.org (gate.volant.org [207.111.218.246]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D27343FD7; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 17:32:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from patl+freebsd@volant.org) Received: from 64-144-229-193.client.dsl.net ([64.144.229.193] helo=[192.168.0.13]) by smtp.volant.org with asmtp (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.22) id 1A1b6c-000317-PU; Mon, 22 Sep 2003 17:32:39 -0700 Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 17:32:37 -0700 From: Pat Lashley To: Tadimeti Keshav , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org Message-ID: <3729783520.1064277157@mccaffrey.phoenix.volant.org> In-Reply-To: <20030922235930.95365.qmail@web86001.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20030922235930.95365.qmail@web86001.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.0b6 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Scan-Signature: 251ac7e244313574134b773d0a556c0572a0fe48 X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) X-Spam-Score-Int: -5 X-Spam-Report: -0.5/5.0 This mail has matched the spam-filter tests listed below. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for details about the specific tests reported. In general, the higher the number of total points, the more likely that it actually is spam. (The 'required' number of points listed below is the arbitrary number above which the message is normally considered spam.) Content analysis details: (-0.50 points total, 5 required) REFERENCES (-0.5 points) Has a valid-looking References header IN_REP_TO (-0.5 points) Has a In-Reply-To header AWL (0.5 points) AWL: Auto-whitelist adjustment Subject: Re: ports on a CD X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 00:32:43 -0000 --On Tuesday, September 23, 2003 00:59:30 +0100 Tadimeti Keshav wrote: > Is it possible to get all of the ports on a CD set? > This is one area where Linux fares better. Debian > offers a 7 CD (OK they don'y make ISOs) set that > contains all packages. The short answer is "No". Some of the ports have licencing restrictions that prevent that. Now if you're just talking about the ports that may legally be included on the CD set; it's a space tradeoff. Adding more would mean more than 4 CDs in the set, which would raise the cost of producing them. Which would in turn raise the price to end-users. On the whole, I'd rather keep the current setup and see about putting more into a DVD based release... > I think the FreeBSD distribution would be better off > having all ports on the 2 additional CDs rather than > have packages. For starters we get 5 window managers. > We could easily do w/o KDE & GNOME and have JRE/JDK > and OOo instead. You might; but others would take the opposite position. I suspect that if a vote were taken KDE and GNOME would get more votes than Java and OOo. And having packages makes the system install -MUCH- faster. You really don't want to make new users wait while the entire GNOME suite is compiled. There are already complaints that the installation process takes too long. > I might just have to give up FreeBSD > for the reason that downloading ports is turning out > to be expensive. Sounds like a business opportunity. Make and sell CD sets with the 'missing' ports. Every couple of months, a new snapshot of the entire ports tree with all of the legally-CD-able distfiles; for people who don't have the (cheap) bandwidth to stay up to date with cvsup... -Pat