From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Sep 27 13:54:30 1995 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id NAA13998 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 13:54:30 -0700 Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id NAA13993 for ; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 13:54:24 -0700 Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id NAA10931; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 13:49:25 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199509272049.NAA10931@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: ports startup scripts To: terry@lambert.org Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 13:49:24 -0700 (MST) Cc: patl@asimov.volant.org, gryphon@healer.com, hackers@freebsd.org, jmb@kryten.atinc.com, peter@taronga.com In-Reply-To: from "terry@lambert.org" at Sep 27, 95 11:09:05 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 951 Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > > I think my biggest objection is that it requires install-time configuration > > administration as part of the install. I'd like to divorce that. Say > > Huh? You have to configure the install at install time ... No. You have to configure the package at install time or subsequent makes will fail. There is no distinction between "installed" and "active". It'd be nmice to be able to load it but not configure it. One example would be your template install without diskless or dataless or read-only support that you think is the prevalent case. You install and then allow the user to post-configure it a component at a time without creating the need for all components to be configured. When I get my box, I incrementally configure stuff installed but not configured by someone else. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.