Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 17:26:01 +0200 From: Andreas Nilsson <andrnils@gmail.com> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> Cc: Current FreeBSD <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: rcs Message-ID: <CAPS9%2BSut7t=S8Kp5WH=0ZMUW2B4DR0O3OAbAvuRUc=D54mMuRA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <525422B6.9040906@mu.org> References: <60177810-8DC4-4EA3-8040-A834B79039D2@orthanc.ca> <52538EDC.2080001@freebsd.org> <52541202.3010707@mu.org> <20131008.170444.74714516.sthaug@nethelp.no> <525422B6.9040906@mu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> wrote: > On 10/8/13 8:04 AM, sthaug@nethelp.no wrote: > >> I think the fact is that most direct users of RCS use it in a very >>>> simple way, and >>>> it works just fine for that. with no real need for any updates or any >>>> change. >>>> >>> With all due respect Julian, The more we discuss this more this really >>> points to the problem that FreeBSD appears to be a challenge to install >>> packages into such that a package moving out of base is such a big deal. >>> >>> Can we fix that instead? >>> >>> I mean, this change should really not be a big deal, but yet it is and >>> this speaks to the core of FreeBSD utility. >>> >> Not commenting on RCS here, but on the concept of moving packages out >> of the base: >> >> - For some of us, the attraction of FreeBSD is that it is a tightly >> integrated system, and the base contains enough useful functionality >> that we don't *have* to add a lot of packages. >> >> - Each package that is moved out of the base system means less useful >> functionality in the base system - and for me: Less reason to use >> FreeBSD instead of Linux. >> >> I absolutely see the problem of maintaining out-of-date packages in >> the base system, and the desirability of making the base system less >> reliant on GPL. I'm mostly troubled by the fact that there seems to >> be a rather strong tendency the last few years of having steadily >> less functionality in the base system - and I'm not at all convinced >> that the right balance has been found here. >> >> This discussion is not new, and I don't expect to convince any new >> persons... >> >> >> I'm sure other devs will disagree, but with ~15 years of FreeBSD > experience and ~13 years as a dev, my very strong opinion is that this > tightly coupled system is actually a boat anchor sinking us. > > Just because no one else does it a certain way, does not mean that a > unique way of doing something is correct and/or sustainable. Maybe in > 1995, 1999, or 2005 even, but not today. Especially in the context of > add-on tools like rcs. > > What we need to discuss is lowering the bar to making custom installs. > > I personally find that installing FreeBSD is useless until I install > "screen, zsh, vim-lite, git" why is that so manual for me? Why can't I > just register a package set somewhere so that all I have to type in is > "alfred.perlstein.devel" into a box during the installer and I get all my > packages by default? > > -- > Alfred Perlstein > > You technically can. Make your own "meta-port" which depends on the stuff you want. Build package-set with for example poudriere, ship those packages on your install-media. Done. /Andreas > > ______________________________**_________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/**mailman/listinfo/freebsd-**current<http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>; > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@** > freebsd.org <freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org>" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPS9%2BSut7t=S8Kp5WH=0ZMUW2B4DR0O3OAbAvuRUc=D54mMuRA>