Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 22:53:36 -0500 From: Ken Wills <kenwills@tds.net> To: Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@lemis.com> Cc: FreeBSD LIST <FreeBSD-Questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: What do we need in a FreeBSD desktop? (was: Peter heads back to M$FT WinBloze [support groups]) Message-ID: <20020730225336.B78265@zaptillion.net> In-Reply-To: <20020731033658.GL17787@wantadilla.lemis.com>; from grog@lemis.com on Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 01:06:58PM %2B0930 References: <00d301c23504$9bbe0c60$0a01a8c0@mswolf> <20020726210341.N20468-100000@earl-grey.cloud9.net> <20020728023016.GA51076@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20020729102059.GA73294@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> <20020731033658.GL17787@wantadilla.lemis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
+++ Greg 'groggy' Lehey [31/07/02 13:06 +0930]: > On Monday, 29 July 2002 at 12:20:59 +0200, Roman Neuhauser wrote: > > On Sun, 28 Jul 2002 12:00:16 +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > > > >> The real problem I have is knowing which of the over 7,000 ports you > >> want to install to get "basic" desktop functionality. > > > > yes. and this is the problem with stuff like your > > instant-workstation port. you can't please everyone, and i dare > > to say that any such thing will only please a tiny minority of > > people. > > This is like saying that people won't use Microsoft because it pleases > only a tiny minority of people. On the flip side, the instant-workstation port shouldn't try to please everyone - that's what 'cd /usr/ports; make install' is for :-) . This would be way too big. > > > probably the reason you haven't got much feedback on the port. > > No, the reason I haven't had much feedback is almost certainly because > nobody knows about it. That's the problem I mention above. > > >> 2. "instant" is a misnomer, at least if you build from source. I'm > >> building on a Dell Inspiron 7500 with a 600 MHz processor, and it > >> takes over 12 hours. > > > > as suggested by someone else before, it could use packages where > > possible, > > Yes, of course it does, but you still need to have the ports. The > instant-workstation port itself really is pretty instantaneous.. > > > but that would make it fall out of the ports system pretty much. > > Why? Doesn't make -DUSE_PACKAGES=1 install work? I could have sworn it did. Maybe a note pointing this out when you type make install. > > >> 3. Once it's built, it works "out of the box". I've installed the > >> XFree86 4 port, and installation is really nothing more than this: > >> > >> # X -configure > >> # mv /root/XF86Config.new /etc > >> # echo exec kdestart > ~me/.xinitrc > >> > >> You can then run startx or xdm and end up in a relatively complete > >> kde environment. > > > > this still makes it lag behind most of linux distros in terms of > > "ease of use". the (new) user still has to know to perform these steps. > > note that i don't care. i don't use linux for a reason. > > A valid point. I could add that to the port. > > >> My questions to you: is there anything missing? > > > > inevitably, yes. plus there are things *i* don't use on that list. > > shell, for example. i don't use bash. if you want to make the port > > attractive for me, you have to let me choose my favorite shell. > > Nobody's stopping you. You can override anything in the port. That's > what the Ports Collection is for. But this port is addressing a > different kind of user. I agree with this. There is no, one-size-fits-all for this. > > if, however, i have to select a shell, i can > >> (cd /usr/ports/shells/chooseone && make install clean) > > just as well. same with the other software. > > Of course. But that's not the point. > > >> Has anybody tried instant-workstation? I'd be interested in > >> suggestions about how to improve it. > > > > you could perhaps abstract the installed software away into software > > categories similar to the /usr/ports directory: > > > > which shell do you want to use? (ash bash tcsh ksh zsh): > > which browser do you want to use? (...): > > That assumes you understand the questions and can decide which is the > one for you. > > > a big boon would be a possibility to configure the ports from > > here. that would probably require a change to the ports system: > > right now you can only tell what knobs a port features by > > reading the Makefile. > > That's a separate, but valid, problem. An alternative to this would be to use dialog, like the mod_php4 port does, and configure accordingly. I might even take a look at this..... > > Greg > -- > Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key > See complete headers for address and phone numbers > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message Ken To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020730225336.B78265>