From owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Thu Apr 9 21:40:42 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD3842A807F for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 21:40:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from zeising+freebsd@daemonic.se) Received: from mail.daemonic.se (mail.daemonic.se [IPv6:2607:f740:d:20::25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48yvhV4k2lz4KYY; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 21:40:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from zeising+freebsd@daemonic.se) Received: from cid.daemonic.se (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mail.daemonic.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48yvhR4cVtz3m5Q; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 21:40:39 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=daemonic.se; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-language:content-type :content-type:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:date :message-id:from:from:references:subject:subject:received :received; s=20151023; t=1586468439; bh=Q70asoIR5McvTaSnjd05USOa ++dFePm5Z1IGz1B6+Kc=; b=lhm1rYjFj3xqMZoweD5Dp2ggCp8H7JBF4cxcsMmz 6QtQNRCXezARdaiccSM2iCJXZXXXrWrWgSlMSTTTVIFA9qr/jVArDXPFf+KJSisj v2cTO3e4E7HGmvjRCXma06hXeWLQDjsNSwdSl8J7S1OOkTAi5DSW1vTszanWq/J3 TUo= X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at daemonic.se Received: from mail.daemonic.se ([127.0.0.1]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256) by cid.daemonic.se (mailscanner.daemonic.se [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10587) with ESMTPS id 0mW-E279Hkor; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 21:40:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from garnet.daemonic.se (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:dca9:201:9874:8a1a:1d6c:a076]) by mail.daemonic.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 48yvhR0Vy3z3lbm; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 21:40:39 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: Ars Technica article on FreeBSD new user experience To: Ed Maste , Kyle Evans Cc: FreeBSD Hackers References: From: Niclas Zeising Message-ID: <8a9e684c-4b6d-884d-4db6-fc7b436117e0@daemonic.se> Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2020 23:40:38 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 48yvhV4k2lz4KYY X-Spamd-Bar: ----- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.00 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-0.999,0]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; TAGGED_FROM(0.00)[freebsd]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0] X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 21:40:42 -0000 On 2020-04-09 21:45, Ed Maste wrote: > On Thu, 9 Apr 2020 at 15:34, Kyle Evans wrote: >> >> 2. re: default shell and niceties: complete agreement, IMO we should >> at least have basically usable history at a minimum > > Complete agreement here, although in 13-CURRENT /bin/sh is > surprisingly usable. I'm normally a zsh user, but after using /bin/sh > on a new laptop I've found !$ is the only thing I strongly miss. > >> 3. re: `pkg search xorg` -- that makes sense, given "pkg search xorg >> returns too many hits to fit on a single page of a text-mode console". > > Indeed, I think the article is technically incorrect, but the > usability problem is the same; if `pkg search xorg` returns more than > a screenfull of results and the desired one scrolled away, does it > really matter that it's actually present? To be honest, what's the difference from how yum or apt does it? At least yum search returns everything that matches, including matches in package descriptions and so on. I haven't used apt systems in a while, but I recall they being similar. This sounds to me just like someone who wants to find something to complain about. Regards -- Niclas