Installation - More user friendly

[Jud]

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 22:28:44 -0500, Parv <parv at pair.com> wrote:

> in message  
> <4261.203.177.105.170.1078798070.squirrel at bayok.msumain.edu.ph>,
> wrote rfa at msumain.edu.ph thusly...
>>
>> I just want to know what the moderator thinks about this and the
>> ethical conditions that are touched...
>
> There is no official moderator per se.  I think whom you are looking
> for is "nanny" or "philosopher" ...
>
>   http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame12.html
>   http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame17.html
>
>
>> Also are these kinds of posts tolerated?
>
> Well, you are seeing them on this list, aren't you?  This will go on
> until one side tires or looses interest, only to be revived some
> time later.  As always.

Just to shoehorn this thread back a bit in the direction whence it came:

Looking at <URL: http://www.distrowatch.com/>, specifically the page hit  
rankings (on the right and down a little), at the moment the 5th-ranked  
Linux distro with an upward trend is Debian, whose install makes FreeBSD's  
look like an automated marvel in comparison.  6th-ranked, also with an  
upward trend, is Gentoo, whose install is also relatively non-automated  
and whose install instructions (the equivalent of the Handbook sections on  
installation) are often noted for their difficulty.  8th-ranked, again  
with an upward trend, is Slackware, whose text-based install is very  
similar to FreeBSD's, with perhaps a bit more help text available.

Granted that the top 4 distros either have automagic installs (Mandrake,  
Fedora/Red Hat) or no install at all (Knoppix, the Debian-based "live  
CD"), it appears not to be true that popularity (at least the *nix world  
version) requires a graphical automated install, were that the goal of the  
FreeBSD project.

Jud