> Recently I discovered that in order to build a port (specifically the > syslog-ng port) that my OpenBSD would need to have X11 > installed. Other than for this requirement I had no desire for X11 on > my build of OpenBSD.
Installing X is the default at install time. If you choose not to follow the defaults, you are on your own. Using cash and credit cards in our modern societies. If you choose not to follow these norms, you are on your own. Leaving people you don't like alive is the norm in our societies. Vary from this, and you are on your own. > When building/installing an OpenBSD system one is given the options > of including several X11 components. Wrong. When installing OpenBSD you are given a default that installs X. If you choose to not install X, you are the one that has deviated from the default. You want to be special and make a decision? 95% or more of OpenBSD people do not choose to be different. Do you understand why you are in a different space than 95% of other people? Never seen your email address before. You understand we cannot satisfy everyone, especially those we've never heard of before they complain about "I made too many custom choices, now I am in trouble". > My first question is, if one is installing X11 purely to facilitate > the building of ports. What are the minimum X11 components one is > required to install? The default is to keep people. Once in a while people choose to be different, and suffer the consequences. If you want to live in an X free world, go back to 1980. > The second question I would like to ask is how far off would a full > blown X11 system be from this minimum? Cutting X into parts. How much of you is required to post to email? Probably most. > Finally, security wise, to what extent does the installing X11 weaken > security or make the system more vulnerable to attack? Who knows. We try our best to make it the best. Do you try your best to help us? I doubt it. So we try the best we can without people like you helping us. That answer your question?
