tmux(1) in base
gnemmi at gmail.com
Tue Sep 22 00:51:13 UTC 2009
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Doug Barton <dougb at freebsd.org> wrote:
> I hate to sound negative, but I really don't find arguments of the
> sort, "the first thing I install on a new system is 'foo', so 'foo'
> should be part of the base" compelling. I, like a lot of other
> FreeBSD users have never used screen or tmux, and probably never will.
> For my money nohup works just fine for long-lived processes that need
> a log. But even the "I don't use it so it shouldn't be there" argument
> is not particularly persuasive.
> We need to take a hard look at what kind of system we want to have.
> It's a lot easier to keep userland utilities like tmux up to date from
> the ports tree than it is in the base. That alone should be the
> deciding factor, but if you want to hear a chorus of the "bloat"
> argument then fill it in here.
> Rather than going down the road of putting everything that some subset
> of our developer base thinks makes a system "usable" into the base I
> would like to suggest that the effort be spent on improving the
> installation tools such that making a system "usable" out of the box
> is a matter of ticking off a few boxes at install time. That change
> will benefit a whole lot more users than installing one more userland
> tool into the base.
+10 ... bge won't resresume from suspend, a simple kldload atapicam causes a
fatal trap12 and ACPI support is just a matter of luck ... and we are at
>  If we're going to go that route then I'm installing bash.
I'd get rid of Sendmail and replace it with something more sensible like DMA
(DragonFly Mail Agent) ... Even the Fedora guys are thinking about it ...
More information about the freebsd-arch