Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 18:55:35 -0600 From: Nate Williams <nate@rocky.sri.MT.net> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: nate@rocky.sri.MT.net (Nate Williams), kelly@fsl.noaa.gov, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ports startup scripts Message-ID: <199509260055.SAA12300@rocky.sri.MT.net> In-Reply-To: <199509260031.RAA06329@phaeton.artisoft.com> References: <199509252309.RAA12073@rocky.sri.MT.net> <199509260031.RAA06329@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
{ Moved to -chat }
> > Your way requires change (ie; more work), while Sean is arguing for the
> > less work case. The average FreeBSD user won't gain anything with the
> > change (asserting that the Desktop is lost), so why give ourselves more
> > work being different just to be different?
>
> Why does having a utility to adminster the system imply "desktop! desktop"
> in your mind?
>
> Because it's usable by desktop-level people?
Huh? What does the init stuff have to do with the desktop? Sean is
arguing that by adding the extra complexity to init you aren't buying
anything for the normal user. His arguement is backed by the fact that
the average user is competent b/c Unix lost/doesn't have/never
had/couldn't have/would like to have but didn't stand a chance on the
desktop. :)
Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199509260055.SAA12300>