Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 15:22:19 +0200 From: Manolis Kiagias <sonicy@otenet.gr> To: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> Cc: Nicky Chorley <nick.chorley@gmail.com>, Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 8.0 installation doesn't contain X distributions Message-ID: <4B20F60B.7090701@otenet.gr> In-Reply-To: <20091210101812.63806e1c.freebsd@edvax.de> References: <20091206102227.7C3BA10656F0@hub.freebsd.org> <20091210185602.T12012@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <20091210101812.63806e1c.freebsd@edvax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Polytropon wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:47:08 +1100 (EST), Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au> wrote:
>
>> In freebsd-questions Digest, Vol 287, Issue 16, Message: 8
>> On Sat, 05 Dec 2009 19:39:08 +0200 Manolis Kiagias <sonicy@otenet.gr> wrote:
>> > Removing X from the distributions is a right step IMO, these are just
>> > 3rd party packages and it seems confusing if they get installed along
>> > with the base system.
>>
>> I think this is taking base-system-only installation purity to excess.
>>
>
> Imagine the following situation: A user wants to run Linux
> applications on FreeBSD. He selects the Linux ABI service
> for startup via sysinstall. The corresponding _enable setting
> will be added to rc.conf, and - surprise! - a package will
> be installed.
>
> The same thing happens when a user installs X. Of course, X
> is not part of the base system, but in the same way that
> sysinstall (down)loads and installs packages when a specific
> service is selected, it should act the same way for X.
> I know that X has become a problematic and very complex
> thing, not just a few packages (as it was in the past
> with XFree86).
>
> X should be installabe in a manner made easy, just like
> the Linux ABI.
>
>
>
>
>> In the case of X,
>> you and I, developers and most people here know to hunt for the Xorg
>> meta-port.
>>
>
> The average user intending to run a desktop system won't
> be happy with compiling stuff...
>
>
Exactly. Most desktop users want a working system in the minimum of time
(Can't blame them for that).
Even with packages, we cannot beat an image-based distro, esp. since it
will also provide all essential default settings.
>
>
>> But the naive or new installer knows of no such thing, and
>> could beat around in the huge lists of X software for ages, wondering
>> what's required and what's not to get a desktop going.
>>
>
> Therefore, I always liked the choice for X in sysinstall: It
> basically installed all the components to get X up and running.
> No big trouble getting the correct xorg-driver-* packages,
> installing and removing them, the xorg-input-* packages with
> the same story...
>
>
>
There is an X.org meta-package that installs everything though. It is
just a problem with the beginner not knowing what to select. This can be
tackled in two ways IMO, first is by creating a "First time FreeBSD
desktop installer" type article, second would be adding a menu choice in
sysinstall "Install a standard X desktop {GNOME,KDE}". I must admit I
much prefer the first solution.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4B20F60B.7090701>