On 31/08/06, Andy Ruhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 8/31/06, Charles M. Hannum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Actually, defining (poorly) the OS to include so much else has been a > > liability for NetBSD in many ways. It has massively slowed the adoption > > of new software versions (e.g. GCC), for one. It also contributed to > > the perception that a better package system and automatic updates were > > not a serious issue. > > It would be interesting to hear more discussion on this. > > If there is a continuum that is what the definition of an OS is, with > a bare kernel on the left and something like SuSE with multiple gigs > of junk on the right, NetBSD is toward the left. I think consensus is > among NetBSD people is that this is a good thing. If you want > something, put it in pkgsrc.
To be fair, it's easy to remove 'junk' from SuSE, and not much harder to pile junk into a working Gentoo, Slackware or NetBSD installation. Ironically one complaint that's often voiced at SuSE is that its selection of rpm junk isn't as extensive as other distros'. Jeff.
