Still having trouble with package upgrades
djackson452 at gmail.com
Wed Mar 7 20:20:21 UTC 2012
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Andrew Gould <andrewlylegould at gmail.com>wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM, David Jackson <djackson452 at gmail.com>
> >> This is irrelevant. FreeBSD has these options because most of its
> >> users are system administrators, developers or other types of geeks.
> >> Serving these needs is a major part of what FreeBSD does. That's why
> >> we have the long standing motto: "FreeBSD - The power to serve".
> >> People who don't want these things, and insist on fool-proof upgrades
> >> will probably be happier running Windows, Mac OS X or some
> >> distribution of Linux. I've been around email lists long enough to
> >> know that every operating system (MS Windows, Linux, etc) occasionally
> >> has its update nightmares.
> >> My advice to you is:
> >> 1. Define your needs.
> >> 2. Choose the best software to meet your needs.
> >> 3. Choose the best operating system to run the software.
> >> 4. Choose the best hardware to run the operating system.
> >> If you've performed these steps out of order, you're unlikely to be
> >> Andrew
> > You have just now declared complete indifference to and alienated about
> > of the potential user base and their needs, those who could care less
> > compiling source and messing with compiler options.
> I disagree. I have provided a process for you (or others) to make
> better decisions regarding the selection of software, operating
> systems and hardware. How could the developers of any operating
> system please everyone without watering down the excellent qualities
> of their creation? It is good that we have so many operating systems
> from which to choose. This allows operating systems to specialize in
> their strengths and for users to prioritize their needs.
> To the extent that you have discussed tools that are broken, I thank
> you; and I hope you have reported the bugs. I'm sure the tools will
> be fixed.
> Every open source operating system is created by developers who decide
> the direction the operating system will take. The operating system is
> backed by its own community. When you throw claims about most users
> not wanting to compile applications from source code, it is clear that
> you have not taken time to learn about the operating system, its
> history or the culture of the community. I encourage you to do so.
I think that your statement here is fundamentally flawed and wrong, because
you have assumed that it is impossible for the OS to be able to be user
friendly and geek friendly at the same time. This is wrong. In fact, I have
outlined ways repeatedly that FreeBSD could provide an easy to use package
system without compromising on the flexibility of ports in any way. The
idea that the OS has to be either difficult to use or it has to be easy to
use for novices is wrong. The OS can be both and I have written about ways
that can be done, in fact, I can show how it can be done in every area. For
instance, with better binary packages, those are simply built from ports
using the best set of options. Those who want to compile for themselves
will still be able to do so, just fine.
So you have presented a position here that is simply not true. FreeBSD can
be more user friendly and as the same time be flexible and friendly to
experts such as yourself.
its not an either or choice.
More information about the freebsd-questions