Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 11:59:57 -0700 From: Dave Hayes <dave@jetcafe.org> To: Daniel Kalchev <daniel@digsys.bg> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ? Message-ID: <201206061859.q56IxvLx045828@hugeraid.jetcafe.org> In-Reply-To: <4FCDA15C.2000700@digsys.bg> References: <CAOgwaMvsv3e1TxDauV038Pp7LRiYeH7oAODE%2Bw-pxHt9oGrXMA@mail.gmail.com> <201206020012.q520CEcf057568@hugeraid.jetcafe.org> <20120602004230.GA14487@in-addr.com> <201206040224.q542OBqk085897@hugeraid.jetcafe.org> <20120604043233.GB32597@lonesome.com> <201206040841.q548fVHa091169@hugeraid.jetcafe.org> <CADLo83-9jE1zAtdXrA78=K5AE7yR4UsMh=efeC5L4kXijaDFaQ@mail.gmail.com> <201206041841.q54IfUow001060@hugeraid.jetcafe.org> <20120604191343.GF10783@isuckatdomains.isuckatdomains.net> <201206041932.q54JWONA001600@hugeraid.jetcafe.org> <4FCDA15C.2000700@digsys.bg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Daniel Kalchev <daniel@digsys.bg> writes: > On 04.06.12 22:32, Dave Hayes wrote: >> That's a fair position. Perhaps it would not be too much trouble to add >> this one idea to optionsng: a "more info" field on each option knob >> which may be filled in by a port maintainer. > The pkg-descr file in the port already contains link to the software's > origin. The various options the software has are or should be described > there. We definitely don't want the ports cluttered with extraneous and > sometimes out of date (and thus misleading) information. I'm describing more of a use case here, not attempting to specify an implementation. If a user invokes 'make', a window is presented to them with various options. It's probably very common that this is met with an initial reaction of "what the hell do these do?", even from the most seasoned of admins (presuming they are unfamiliar with the software they have been asked to install). I claim it would be an improvement to have that information at the fingertips of the make invoker. I believe this is the first time I've seen more documentation labeled as "extraneous". :) I had thought to suggest an implementation by having a simple pkg-option-desr file which describes the options and implications in each port. Are you suggesting that such a file would be unwelcome? I have built many ports for many years. IIRC I've seen the option descriptions you mention in pkg-descr maybe 0.1% of the time. (That's my sense, not a measured objective number.) Usually I have to go digging through the Makefile, then the source to find these answers. > In all case, compiling from source is not for those having no clue > what they do. ... you need to make informed decisions on options > yourself. If this is beyond you (and not you personally), ... > Since it is very likely that you interpret this as yet another elitist > comment, Actually, I hadn't thought of this conceptual linkage until you suggested it here. :) Still, you are quite correct. The likelihood of anyone interpreting your position as 'elitist' from these comments is high. I will, of course, not interpret them that way. > If this is beyond you (and not you personally), then by all means use > pre-packaged software in binary form. Heh. Even this idea is beyond most normal users, who should likely use PC-BSD or Ubuntu. In responding in this thread, I was thinking of the reasonably clued system admin level users when I said "users". As an SA, in many situations, you aren't able to have fun digging for information. It's much easier to have the answers right here in front of you. I know if I ever committed a port, I would quite likely spend the extra five minutes to put option documentation in a number of places, even if this angered some of the more anal of the community. > elsewhere" or "apparently, you don't want the number of FreeBSD users to > grow". Then you waste everyone's time -- that could be spent on > answering other people's "stupid" questions. I see. Personally, I believe this way: It is the responsibility of the responder to determine whether their response is a waste of time or not. Blaming anyone else other than you (the generic 'you', not you personally) for the inappropriate use of your time should only really happen in an employment or indentured servitude relationship; certainly not on a mailing list. :) Given that the "FreeBSD wants more users" idea is repeatedly brought up on lists (at least this is my impression), I would presume that the subject of 'more users' is somewhat relevant to some people; one look at the subject of this thread should be enough to demonstrate relevance. -- Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - dave@jetcafe.org >>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<< Implementation: (n.) The fruitless struggle by the talented and underpaid to fulfill promises made by the rich and ignorant
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201206061859.q56IxvLx045828>