why BSDs got no love

Sdävtaker sdavtaker at gmail.com
Mon Dec 28 18:48:49 UTC 2009

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 <petrus4 at tpg.com.au> wrote:

> 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 talking about is the
> download mechanism.  Apparently when certain files get downloaded with it,
> they actually get copied in-place during the transfer process, which means
> that if you abort it, you can end up with partially digested conf files (my
> /etc/passwd got hosed once) all over the place.
> What I'd propose would be caching whatever files the system needs to
> download until everything is cached locally, and then installing the lot
> after that, rather than doing both downloading and installing/copying in the
> same step.  That way you can safely abort during the process if you need to.
> A scenario where individual files that are to be rewritten, get temporarily
> backed up until the setup is complete would probably also really help.
> So as said, the interface is fine, but I think the internal mechanism could
> definitely benefit from being made a bit more robust.
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-advocacy at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-advocacy-unsubscribe at freebsd.org
> "


More information about the freebsd-advocacy mailing list