From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jan 29 15:22:39 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA16168 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 29 Jan 1998 15:22:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from hammer.ipaper.com (hammer.ipaper.com [206.98.137.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA16138 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 1998 15:22:35 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from capriotti@geocities.com) Received: from hot_nt (node69.mpc.com.br [200.246.0.69]) by hammer.ipaper.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA00819 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 1998 16:55:03 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980129205927.0095e620@pop.mpc.com.br> X-Sender: capriotti@pop.mpc.com.br X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 20:59:43 -0300 To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG From: Capriotti Subject: Re: /usr/src/release/sysinstall needs US. :-)) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG X-To-Unsubscribe: mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org "unsubscribe hackers" At 09:05 PM 1/29/98 +0000, you wrote: >TCl vs. Java, any others for the melting pot? > >As far as extending any 'Java' client, all you need (and I think someones >allready mentioned this) is a system similar to SNMP MIB's, i.e. directions to >the client where to put check boxes, text fields, what they should contain >(labels), how to verify them (field masks etc.) - I'll freely admit it's a >thin line between Java, TCL, cgi & someones bound to mention Active-X Again, if this thin line will cause any probl;em, let's just think about "globalization". Building an universal-like client (i.e. Java) Will allow Free to have a plus in its favor, just like Novell did with NT. Novell has released administrative tools for NetWare to run under Windows NT, in a way of saying "OK, dolks, if you can't choose the workstation that you will run on your company, at least be able to manage our operating system from them. Keep the piece of junk on your desk, but at least be able to manage our operating system". That's what happens in several companies: The administrator will choose the Notwork Os, but will have no power of decision over the workstation OS. If one can mannage FBSD from the MS piece of junk, wouldn't it be even more attractive ?