On Sat, 10 Apr 1999, Rod Taylor wrote:
> > Right or wrong, you forgot: > > > > 5. BSD tradition. > > > > Case 5 justifies Fortran. > > > > Me, I'd rather have Fortran as a port. I'd even grudgingly accept > > fortune as a port, as a matter of fact. Our base system is bloated. > > While a lot of widely used programs are only available through > > ports, a lot of obscure and obsolete stuff remains on our tree. They > > are there because of 5. As long as 5 exists, Fortran belongs in the > > tree. If we ever get rid of 5, then it's time to get the knife to > > our tree... Or the axe, if the vikings decide to have the first cut. > > :-) > > > > Whelp... I vote to break tradition. Hack away... The installer takes > care of alot of stuff like ports installs. Perhaps different standard > setups could be configured as ports. Ie. 'bloated setup' would require > all the ports which are currently included. > > 'Server setup' port wouldn't have any Client stuff. > > 'Desktop' could install a 'nicer' windomanager (kde? gnome?) for teh user, > and be pre-setup to start xdm, etc. > > The installer can currently install packages, so reworking those 'system > install options' to fit simpler naming convention than 'Kernel Hacker, X > user, X+ source, etc.' may be appropriate. > > I know.. lots of talk and no action. Oh well... my thoughts :) > well geeze Xwindows isnt in the base source tree anymore, what more do ya want ;) rob To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
