From: Uwe Dippel (udippeluniten.edu.my)
Date: Tue Nov 01 2005 - 05:36:33 CST

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Tue, 01 Nov 2005 11:39:25 +1100, Shane J Pearson wrote:

> What is so difficult? Install a pkg or port, read the pkg_info for it,
> do what it says. If you come across a problem: apropos, Google, MARC...
> If you mean difficult as in "a little more effort" then ok, but it seems
> like a small price to pay. Months ago a had to install Red Hat 9 on an
> AMD XP 2800+ with 1GB RAM and a 7200RPM PATA disk, it took BLOODY AGES!
> I felt like I was installing Windows XP on an old machine. OpenBSD takes
> _minutes_, including getting X going. Then a little more to install the
> packages I like.

Seconded. I still keep thinking that an initial install isn't sooo
difficult. Rather simple, that is.
But when I look at our desktops (> 500), who'll ever do the upgrade once
per 6 months (or a larger upgrade once per 12 months) ?
This is why we rather roll out the 'apt-get update && apt-get
upgrade'-systems for *nix.
Let's be realistic, there is no way to ftp... patch... make... pkg_add
-u... manually on a larger number of systems.
*If* you talk about 'desktop', a fully scriptable version is
indispensable before you start to think any further.
The solution would rather be to have more developers so that all changes
in /etc/ and ports can be done in a transparent manner.

> Fork OpenBSD and you'll be
> loosing them. That seems like a pretty extreme loss to me.

Fork is no solution, as far as I can see. Just the opposite is needed.

Uwe

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]