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
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 i
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
> >wrote:
> >>Update:
> >>
> >>I confirmed that the scheduled publication date for my article will be
> >>Tuesday the 29
On Tue 29 Dec 2009 at 06:38:23 PST Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 16:56:51 -0700, Chad Perrin 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
Well done, Chad
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 16:56:51 -0700, Chad Perrin 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
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 wrote:
> The
Astrodog writes:
> Basically... if you really want to see this change, I think you're
> gonna have to do it yourself.
What do you think this is, a collaborative open source project? Furrfu!
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - d...@des.no
___
freebsd-advocac
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 talkin
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.
> Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:43:35 +1000
> From: "Petrus"
> Subject: Re: why BSDs got no love
> To:
> Message-ID: <001001ca85c4$762faa80$0301a...@jim4fb89194d83>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>reply-type=o
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
goin
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 woul
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
"Julian H. Stacey" writes:
> Randi Harper wrote:
>> Sure, once someone writes something everyone can agree upon. Until
>> then, sorry, you're stuck with sysinstall. :)
>
> Yes, & All will never agree, it's schismatic, sort of thing
> attractive to PCBSD DesktopBSD or Yet-Another-BSD forks/front e
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 ex
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
Charlie Kester wrote:
> On Tue 15 Dec 2009 at 07:33:49 PST Jan Husar wrote:
>> http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/opensource/?p=1123&tag=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
> 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
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 4:34 AM, Peer Schaefer wrote:
> 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
> a
> > CLI program
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Tony Theodore 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
>>> > 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 (*)
>>> > (*) Maybe these 2 a
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 06:58:46 -0800
Randi Harper wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 6:50 AM, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> > Peer Schaefer wrote:
> >
> >> BTW, the Debian installer consists (a) of a modular, frontend agnostic
> >> backend, and (b) different frontend "plugins", e.g. a curses-frontend o
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 wrote:
> http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/opensource/?p=1123&tag=nl.e011
>
> --
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:48 AM, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> Randi Harper wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 6:50 AM, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
>> > Peer Schaefer wrote:
>> >
>> >> BTW, the Debian installer consists (a) of a modular, frontend agnostic
>> >> backend, and (b) different frontend "plugin
Randi Harper wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 6:50 AM, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> > Peer Schaefer 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 X/GTK+-frontend. This is a m
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 6:50 AM, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> Peer Schaefer 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 X/GTK+-frontend. This is a modular and very elegant approach
2009/12/24 Diane Bruce :
> 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=1123&tag=nl.e011
>>
>> Others have pointed out that PC-BSD meets the need expressed in this
>> articl
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 t
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=1123&tag=nl.e011
>
> Others have pointed out that PC-BSD meets the need expressed in this
> article.
I believe this is because o
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 a
> CLI program that reads in a fairly simple fixed script or language to do the
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
> b
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 04:33:49PM +0100, Jan Husar wrote:
> http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/opensource/?p=1123&tag=nl.e011
By the way . . . as another writer at TechRepublic, I've written another
article that responds substantially to what Jack Wallen said about the
various BSD Unix systems in
Charlie Kester wrote:
On Tue 15 Dec 2009 at 07:33:49 PST Jan Husar wrote:
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/opensource/?p=1123&tag=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 lo
+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 w
On Tue 15 Dec 2009 at 07:33:49 PST Jan Husar wrote:
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/opensource/?p=1123&tag=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 judg
Jan Husar wrote:
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/opensource/?p=1123&tag=nl.e011
Why a box is not an apple and how would we make a box look like an
apple? That is a question! Because if we could turn all the boxes into
apples, oh boy, how many apples would we have! Where all those apples
wo
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 5:00 AM, wrote:
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:04:21 +0100
> From: Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav
> Subject: Re: why BSDs got no love
> To: Han Hwei Woo
> Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org
> Message-ID: <864onrkr3e@ds4.des.no>
> Content
Han Hwei Woo writes:
> 2. There is a live CD.
> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ISO-IMAGES-i386/8.0/8.0-RELEASE-i386-livefs.iso
That's a misnomer. For all practical purposes, there is no difference
between livefs and disc1 except for the lack of packages. When people
download something called
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).
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 th
40 matches
Mail list logo
