> Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:43:35 +1000
> From: "Petrus" <petr...@tpg.com.au>
> Subject: Re: why BSDs got no love
> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Message-ID: <001001ca85c4$762faa80$0301a...@jim4fb89194d83>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> >I think what we're looking at here is that sysinstall should probably
> > be replaced... but it works well enough that it doesn't *have* to be
> The virtue of sysinstall, however, is that it is console based. I for one
> would rather endure sysinstall's idiosyncracies, if it still means that I'm
> going to be able to reliably install on whatever ancient, eldritch hardware
> I happen to have with me at the time.
> If someone wants to write something X based, with hardware detection a la
> Ubuntu, and all the proverbial bells and whistles and flashing lights, then
> by all means; (and I think they already have, with finstall) but I think
> FreeBSD absolutely needs to keep a console-based installer as a fallback
> old hardware.
I think PC-BSD does just fine with this portion of it - sysinstall is still
there, version 8 can do a pure FreeBSD 8 install *or* a PC-BSD install (with
the extra PBI bits and whatnot) and has a nice graphical installer as well
as a LiveCD image.
There is absolutely no reason to change the default FreeBSD installer in my
opinion, when the PC-BSD one will suffice for the 'snazzy' desktop installs.
email@example.com mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-advocacy-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"