Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 15:10:07 -0800 From: Kent Stewart <kstewart@owt.com> To: Cliff Sarginson <csfbsd@raggedclown.net> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: iso images Message-ID: <3C7AC44F.8060202@owt.com> References: <3C7A72D8.3040706@free.fr> <3C7AB764.6000009@owt.com> <20020225224841.GB12531@raggedclown.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Cliff Sarginson wrote: > On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 02:15:00PM -0800, Kent Stewart wrote: > >> >> Alain LIEFOOGHE wrote: >> >> >>> excuse me for my english, but i have a question for the people >>> who decide what quind of packages are included in the >>> install iso. Why dont they make an install iso with the >>> packages needed for a nearly complete workstation (full KDE, >>> mozilla, printing and office) ? I think it will be good for >>> freebsd and much more people install it on their computer for >>> internet and the base of the office working. thank you, by. >>> >> >> I was following the thread on what was added to cdrom #1 and >> your questions was foremost in their minds. What it really >> came down to, in my mind, was that a (1) cdrom wasn't >> sufficient. You needed a DVD and that was not a solution. For >> example, you and I like KDE but there are people out there >> that would not touch KDE if they were paid to use it and you >> can not add them all on a single cdrom. >> >> You also have to face that fact that a release is not the final solution. >> It is a starting point. The system has security patches. The ports >> have security fixes and they are continuously being updated. >> Any cdrom that you purchase is a starting point and not a >> destination. >> >> >> > While I agree with much of this, I still think it is an > interesting idea that someone may want to make a project out of. > After all all the tools to do such a thing are available. It just > needs someone with the motivation to try and build such a thing. > It would not be seen as any kind of replacement, but as an > additional demonstration that FreeBSD is capable of being used to > complete a complete working environment. > > The updating part may create some tricky issues..but probably not insurmountable > ones. > > (p.s. I am not volunteering :) Part of this is why it is convient that they separate the ports and the system. There are only a couple of ports that need to follow the system and lsof is the only one that comes to mind. If I can think of one really easily, there must be others :). I think one of the areas that people don't want to deal with is that a release is not a solution. We had RELENG_4_4 and now we have RELENG_4_5 and there are a lot of people out there that are ignoring facts of life. For example, anyone running a release that is older than 4.4 have a number of serious problems in several daemons. They are vulnerable to being hacked. Security is a sliding window that requires that you follow an active project. They aren't alone because all you have to do is look at your httpd-error.log and you can see how many MS installations have worse problems :). It is so bad that they can't install W2K on a system available to the internet and not take a chance on being infected with Nimda or Code Red. They have to go to MS's corporate site and download the patch and added it before they bring a system on line. Fortunately, we haven't seen any problems like that. Kent -- Kent Stewart Richland, WA mailto:kbstew99@hotmail.com http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C7AC44F.8060202>