8.0 installation doesn't contain X distributions

[Polytropon]

On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:47:08 +1100 (EST), Ian Smith <smithi at nimnet.asn.au> wrote:
> In freebsd-questions Digest, Vol 287, Issue 16, Message: 8
> On Sat, 05 Dec 2009 19:39:08 +0200 Manolis Kiagias <sonicy at otenet.gr> wrote:
>  > Removing X from the distributions is a right step IMO, these are just
>  > 3rd party packages and it seems confusing if they get installed along 
>  > with the base system.
> 
> I think this is taking base-system-only installation purity to excess.

Imagine the following situation: A user wants to run Linux
applications on FreeBSD. He selects the Linux ABI service
for startup via sysinstall. The corresponding _enable setting
will be added to rc.conf, and - surprise! - a package will
be installed.

The same thing happens when a user installs X. Of course, X
is not part of the base system, but in the same way that
sysinstall (down)loads and installs packages when a specific
service is selected, it should act the same way for X.
I know that X has become a problematic and very complex
thing, not just a few packages (as it was in the past
with XFree86).

X should be installabe in a manner made easy, just like
the Linux ABI.



> In the case of X, 
> you and I, developers and most people here know to hunt for the Xorg 
> meta-port. 

The average user intending to run a desktop system won't
be happy with compiling stuff...



> But the naive or new installer knows of no such thing, and 
> could beat around in the huge lists of X software for ages, wondering 
> what's required and what's not to get a desktop going.

Therefore, I always liked the choice for X in sysinstall: It
basically installed all the components to get X up and running.
No big trouble getting the correct xorg-driver-* packages,
installing and removing them, the xorg-input-* packages with
the same story...





-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...