Date: Sat, 4 Nov 1995 14:10:53 +0100 (MET) From: grog@lemis.de (Greg Lehey) To: nate@rocky.sri.MT.net (Nate Williams) Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: More nits Message-ID: <199511041310.OAA19109@allegro.lemis.de> In-Reply-To: <199511011940.MAA15296@rocky.sri.MT.net> from "Nate Williams" at Nov 1, 95 12:40:02 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nate Williams writes: > > > > 3. I'd like to see a few more things on the standard installation. > > > Linux "everything" really does install everything; FreeBSD > > > "everything" misses out things which I consider essential, such as > > > bash, less and emacs. > > First of all, the standard pager in FreeBSD (more) is really less with > the defaults changed to behave like the old more, so you probably don't > need it. Second of all, I would never install emacs on my machine and > would consider it a waste of disk space. And, I use tcsh so I have no > need of bash. Oh, boy, a religious war! Great, great. Well, *I* would never dream of using vi or any of this *csh stuff, so there... Oops, back to reality. I think the real point here is that it makes FreeBSD look inferior to Linux. If you select "install everything", you don't get everything, and the installation procedure is opaque enough that people could easily get the impression that it's just not there. I've got a few ideas on how to restructure things, but I don't think now's the time. > However, if you can think of an easy way of pointing > folks to the 'standard' packages such as these I think Jordan would be > willing to do the work if it isn't too hard. How about dividing things up into individual packages? I did that in my System V CD-ROM, and I think it works well enough, except that you now have 150 different packages to choose from. Oh well, you can't have your cake and eat it. > > > 4. shutdown no longer needs the -f option. Fine, but it could ignore > > > it (or print a warning) rather than failing if it gets it. > > > > Hmm.. > > Double hmm.... It'd sure be easy to ignore it though.. Sure, that's all I'm saying. > > > 8. sysconfig waits until you commit before asking what kind of > > > bootstrap manager you want to use. I think it should belong in the > > > partition editor. Please tell me if you change this one, since I > > > need to document it. > > > > I think you're right. Hmmm. I will have it ask you when you leave > > the editor, 'k? What do the others think? > > I agree. Fine by me, too. Greg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199511041310.OAA19109>