On 10/8/13 8:26 AM, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Alfred Perlstein <bri...@mu.org
<mailto:bri...@mu.org>> wrote:
On 10/8/13 8:04 AM, sth...@nethelp.no <mailto:sth...@nethelp.no>
wrote:
I think the fact is that most direct users of RCS use
it in a very
simple way, and
it works just fine for that. with no real need for
any updates or any
change.
With all due respect Julian, The more we discuss this more
this really
points to the problem that FreeBSD appears to be a
challenge to install
packages into such that a package moving out of base is
such a big deal.
Can we fix that instead?
I mean, this change should really not be a big deal, but
yet it is and
this speaks to the core of FreeBSD utility.
Not commenting on RCS here, but on the concept of moving
packages out
of the base:
- For some of us, the attraction of FreeBSD is that it is a
tightly
integrated system, and the base contains enough useful
functionality
that we don't *have* to add a lot of packages.
- Each package that is moved out of the base system means less
useful
functionality in the base system - and for me: Less reason to use
FreeBSD instead of Linux.
I absolutely see the problem of maintaining out-of-date
packages in
the base system, and the desirability of making the base
system less
reliant on GPL. I'm mostly troubled by the fact that there
seems to
be a rather strong tendency the last few years of having steadily
less functionality in the base system - and I'm not at all
convinced
that the right balance has been found here.
This discussion is not new, and I don't expect to convince any new
persons...
I'm sure other devs will disagree, but with ~15 years of FreeBSD
experience and ~13 years as a dev, my very strong opinion is that
this tightly coupled system is actually a boat anchor sinking us.
Just because no one else does it a certain way, does not mean that
a unique way of doing something is correct and/or sustainable.
Maybe in 1995, 1999, or 2005 even, but not today. Especially in
the context of add-on tools like rcs.
What we need to discuss is lowering the bar to making custom installs.
I personally find that installing FreeBSD is useless until I
install "screen, zsh, vim-lite, git" why is that so manual for me?
Why can't I just register a package set somewhere so that all I
have to type in is "alfred.perlstein.devel" into a box during the
installer and I get all my packages by default?
--
Alfred Perlstein
You technically can. Make your own "meta-port" which depends on the
stuff you want. Build package-set with for example poudriere, ship
those packages on your install-media. Done.
Oh I have done that in the past, but why the editing, the makefiles, the
etc, etc, etc. Why isn't there a customize.freebsd.org where I just hit
a few checkboxes, save and then hit download?
--
Alfred Perlstein
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
