From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 6 05:20:41 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F17B81065672 for ; Thu, 6 May 2010 05:20:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sektie@gmail.com) Received: from mail-iw0-f193.google.com (mail-iw0-f193.google.com [209.85.223.193]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACCFA8FC0A for ; Thu, 6 May 2010 05:20:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iwn31 with SMTP id 31so7106632iwn.27 for ; Wed, 05 May 2010 22:20:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ipQXX8XRqWfQ6fvD4D8x2THZT4HX16vn/8b8GIdT9zw=; b=AIp+cCe7zduND9yh8eCimLix+Zew54tRcyz1Go5kAubi9VebXa9O3VRkCTNJkMowvT IVNY6kH+mMaEbGMEJC3B8Wbq/sQyHgPthcUREqo/Li9UxVuzs9/7go4/0P232gIC61Pp 4fBhMizXG9KWW8k8wJR+ctgUDRzRggKB8MZyM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=m6wlbJQoN6J0wZo0l9b0EjEm5jxx6X1XqQy7Gxk+ylKSLIzwfoKVpajQJ8pWVQeKQ3 WgTbPJs6wNU+rkEcerF8/Ev/ck1E8zT4liA2CZ+3Wmc4qbho4zKJqcX0ejetEE+oUoLn xXBShGb5zTz8o9aDTizkk8xevKBNIzbB9Zi2s= Received: by 10.231.182.79 with SMTP id cb15mr1417919ibb.71.1273123230633; Wed, 05 May 2010 22:20:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nymph.freebsdgirl.com (deviant.freebsdgirl.com [173.8.183.73]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 22sm473888iwn.12.2010.05.05.22.20.28 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 05 May 2010 22:20:29 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Randi Harper Message-ID: <4BE25196.5020908@freebsd.org> Date: Wed, 05 May 2010 22:20:22 -0700 From: Randi Harper User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20091021) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mikel king References: <4BE03042.5010806@ipv6canada.com> <4BE0A341.1010207@a1poweruser.com> <4BE0E8B1.3000802@a1poweruser.com> <4BE1E3FA.4010602@onetel.com> <4BE22F91.9000304@freebsd.org> <42A4AF3E-1AC6-4AFE-9FA7-5BE7C1055AEB@olivent.com> In-Reply-To: <42A4AF3E-1AC6-4AFE-9FA7-5BE7C1055AEB@olivent.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Marc G. Fournier" , "questions@freebsd.org" , Chris Whitehouse Subject: Re: Addition to BSDstats X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 May 2010 05:20:41 -0000 mikel king wrote: > > On May 5, 2010, at 10:55 PM, Randi Harper wrote: > >> Marc G. Fournier wrote: >>> On Wed, 5 May 2010, Chris Whitehouse wrote: >>> >>>> I seem to have probs with mine too. I was under the impression that >>>> bsdstats was installed by default (in the base system?) >>> >>> There has been talk about adding it as an option to sysinstall, but, >>> unfortunately, I don't have enough knowledge of sysinstall to add >>> it, and nobody else has step'd forward that does ... the idea wasn't >>> to auto-install/enable, but to make it more visible while you are >>> installing ... >>> >>> Anyone out there able to do this ... ? >> >> I have not heard any talk about this up until this email. I wouldn't >> want to add an option to sysinstall for this unless bsdstats was part >> of base. If it were, this would be trivial, but I don't really want >> to pop up any optional package menus other than what already exists. >> >> -- randi > > This idea was mentioned a few years as a way to improve advocacy > statistics. Something short and sweet, with a one or two line > explanation encouraging people to install the BSDStats system. If it > were a yes/no option similar to the "Would you like to install Linux > Compatibility" then it would be a no brainer. Honestly this seems > relatively unobtrusive and quite logical. You're right, it is just for advocacy statistics. bsdstats is not an integral part of system operation. We prompt for Linux Compatibility because it could be needed for technical reasons. While advocacy is certainly important, the installer needs to be simplified, not complicated even more with unnecessary options and menus. -- randi