On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 03:17:05PM -0800, Charlie Kester wrote:
On Tue 29 Dec 2009 at 14:51:23 PST Chad Perrin wrote:
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:39:01PM -0800, Charlie Kester wrote:
One question, however. Are we prepared to back up the claim that the
sexy bits of PC-BSD are the least
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 16:56:51 -0700, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote:
Update:
I confirmed that the scheduled publication date for my article will be
Tuesday the 29th.
It's up at http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=2888
pgpQ4MKFzCBPF.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:39:01PM -0800, Charlie Kester wrote:
On Tue 29 Dec 2009 at 06:38:23 PST Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 16:56:51 -0700, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com
wrote:
Update:
I confirmed that the scheduled publication date for my article will be
Tuesday the
On Tue 29 Dec 2009 at 14:51:23 PST Chad Perrin wrote:
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:39:01PM -0800, Charlie Kester wrote:
One question, however. Are we prepared to back up the claim that the
sexy bits of PC-BSD are the least secure? Your argument depends on
that claim, since it's also implied in
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.
I won't say that sysinstall couldn't benefit from at least *some*
renovation. ;)
The interface is fine, sure, but what I'm primarily
it will be nice make sysinstall use the port tree, since a lot of
applications in the dvd use to fail the install because dependencies that
can be resolved in the ports (as portinstall/portmaster does whena package
dependency is not fulfilled).
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 14:59, Petrus
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:43:35 +1000
From: Petrus petr...@tpg.com.au
Subject: Re: why BSDs got no love
To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org
Message-ID: 001001ca85c4$762faa80$0301a...@jim4fb89194d83
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1;
reply-type=original
I
Friday, December 25, 2009, 9:24:25 AM, you wrote:
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
replaced, and most people aren't bothered enough by it to write code
to come up with something new.
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
replaced, and most people aren't bothered enough by it to write code
to come up with something new. Certainly, having things like zfs
support in sysinstall
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
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 03:50:25PM +0100 I heard the voice of
Julian H. Stacey, and lo! it spake thus:
All of 4.11, 7.1 8.0 man sysinstall contain:
This product is currently at the end of its life cycle and
will eventually be replaced.
That's a kinder version of what it had in
+1 to a better installer, graphical or not.
I can practically install FreeBSD blindfolded on the current one, but only
because I've done it so many times. The first few attempts were extremely
frustrating; the menu flow in the current installer makes little sense --
especially if something goes
Exactly. That's what I meant when I said the installer is good but needs
a little polishing.
--Peer
Am Dienstag, den 22.12.2009, 23:55 -0800 schrieb Shane Calimlim:
+1 to a better installer, graphical or not.
I can practically install FreeBSD blindfolded on the current one, but only
Matthew Seaman wrote:
... an installer as
a
CLI program that reads in a fairly simple fixed script or language to do
the
installation work, and have separate Curses and/or X based programs to al
low
users to create the installation script interactively.
I admit being seduced at times
2009/12/24 Diane Bruce d...@db.net:
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 07:24:10PM -0800, Charlie Kester wrote:
On Tue 15 Dec 2009 at 07:33:49 PST Jan Husar wrote:
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/opensource/?p=1123tag=nl.e011
Others have pointed out that PC-BSD meets the need expressed in this
Randi Harper wrote:
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 6:50 AM, Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com wrote:
Peer Schaefer peer.schae...@hamburg.de wrote:
BTW, the Debian installer consists (a) of a modular, frontend agnostic
backend, and (b) different frontend plugins, e.g. a curses-frontend or
a
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:48 AM, Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com wrote:
Randi Harper wrote:
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 6:50 AM, Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com wrote:
Peer Schaefer peer.schae...@hamburg.de wrote:
BTW, the Debian installer consists (a) of a modular, frontend agnostic
Incidentally, I've contacted the author of this article and offered to
correct/discuss some of his assumptions. Waiting to see if he decides
to email me back. :P
-- randi
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Jan Husar jan.hu...@skosi.org wrote:
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 06:58:46 -0800
Randi Harper ra...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 6:50 AM, Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com wrote:
Peer Schaefer peer.schae...@hamburg.de wrote:
BTW, the Debian installer consists (a) of a modular, frontend agnostic
backend, and (b)
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Tony Theodore to...@logyst.com wrote:
Perhaps the way to go is a common table of target defaults eg
/usr/src/usr.sbin/sysinstall/install.cfg
Which could then be edited by all of
Front end CLI (*)
Front end curses GUI (*)
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 4:34 AM, Peer Schaefer peer.schae...@hamburg.dewrote:
On wednesday, the 23.12.2009, 08:38 + Matthew Seaman wrote:
At the risk of being challenged to produce code (Which, alas, I don't
have
sufficient skill to do. Or sufficient time.) I'd design an installer as
Yeah... I know what vi *is*. I don't see how it's relevant as an
installation option. And by the way, you do edit the install.cfg file
by hand. We don't have a handy tool to automagically create one of
these as far as I know. You know what options are possible by looking
at the sysinstall man
Hello all:
I'm recently new to FreeBSD (former Linux user) and I would like to
share my thoughts in the matter.
(1)
I love *BSD, especially FreeBSD because of the way it is. I read the
handbook before installing it and my
first impressions with the installation process was fine. My biggest
Update:
I confirmed that the scheduled publication date for my article will be
Tuesday the 29th.
--
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
pgpep7nRt2VNr.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Shane Calimlim wrote:
+1 to a better installer, graphical or not.
I'd settle for one that while installing packages you've selected,
doesn't sit there saying to switch discs in what seems to be a very
random order... I still think that would help a lot Why DOES the
installer do that
On Tue 15 Dec 2009 at 07:33:49 PST Jan Husar wrote:
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/opensource/?p=1123tag=nl.e011
Others have pointed out that PC-BSD meets the need expressed in this
article.
As for FreeBSD itself, the question must be asked: do we WANT to get
more love from people who
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/opensource/?p=1123tag=nl.e011
--
---
| Jan Husar
|
| doing what matters
| http://tinyurl.com/ya4xlqe
Earthcause - in the cause of the Planet
#1 Mission to Kosovo (2009, 2010)
#2 Mission to Cambodia (2010)
#3 Mission to Galapagos
I disagree (partially).
1st: PCBSD has a graphical installer. But I don't think a graphical
installer is needed. An installer with a curses-like menu-driven
interface is sufficient for most techy users (and face it: aunt Jamie is
not the target audience for *BSD). But I admit that some menus of
1. Graphical installers don't work over serial consoles.
2. There is a live CD.
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ISO-IMAGES-i386/8.0/8.0-RELEASE-i386-livefs.iso
. Use FreeSBIE if you need a live cd with a graphical environment.
3. mount -t ext2fs
Peer Schaefer wrote:
I disagree (partially).
29 matches
Mail list logo
