PC-BSD and DesktopBSD compared to FreeBSD

[Subhro]

Hello Charles,

Thanks for your insight. I would also like to express my views in this
regard. Every OS has a target audience and every OS has its own
strengths and weaknesses. Something which would nicely for you does
not mean that it would work exactly the same way for everyone else in
the world. You are free to have personal opinions but please be kind
enough to keep them *personal*. What you have done could very well
generate a troll.

PLEASE DO NOT TROLL.

Also to the best of my knowledge the purpose of this list is to
discuss about the different features/ changes of the STABLE tree. Feel
free to move the discussion to advocacy@ mailing list.

Thanks and Best Regards
Subhro


On 9/15/06, Charles P. Schaum <verbo.solo at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> A note on PC-BSD and DesktopBSD as compared to my -STABLE experiences:
>
> -STABLE works best. First, PC-BSD will panic under more conditions than
> -RELEASE, -STABLE or DesktopBSD. I did some monkeying around and found
> that to be true, especially with older boxes. Second, DesktopBSD works
> better than PC-BSD, and noticeably so. But it's based on 5 and I want 6.
> So that kinda throws a spanner in the works.
>
> Both desktop installers, however, do not easily support an install over
> multiple disks or a lot of customization. FreeBSD does.
>
> That's the same reason why I like the Debian installer and the old
> Ubuntu installer over many of the others. (Although the Ubuntu
> installer, old and new, has geometry issues.) Fedora's default is to use
> an LVM setup that will be a pain in the tush if you install anything
> else over it unless you use a third-party util to hose all the LVM info.
> Merely creating a new FS, i.e., installing FBSD in the slice where
> Fedora was, won't cut it; you will get weirdness in the boot loader.
>
> When I want desktop, I don't want dumb. I want defaults for those that
> want them and then I want to depart from that when needed. The desktop
> attempts based on FreeBSD do not easily handle this. I see that as
> basically a show-stopper. The elegant thing about FreeBSD is the way in
> which one can vary things to meet individual needs. This is no
> "canonical distro" template mentality. The real trick is to make a
> desktop work with such variation.
>
> One thing I see, for example, is an opportunity to have a decision like
> "here is some default art, themes, whatever" in a port/package for those
> that want a "my machine looks like FreeBSD" feel. One might suggest that
> all ports that would normally be associated with menus and MIME types in
> XFCE, KDE and Gnome, etc. would arrange to install these in the expected
> places. Presently, some do; some don't.
>
> One need not integrate a lot into the OS. Indeed, scripts for removable
> media events and the like can safely remain in ports. But it strikes me
> that Linux and Windows, as well as MacOS, all have a certain "look and
> feel" per distro and that a move to say "for those that want a default
> option of >>look and feel<< and don't want to continually edit menus
> (for which KDE is easiest) then we have a plan for you." This would not
> add too much burden to the port maintainers and it would just make the
> learning curve a little easier for noobs, until they do a
> BOFH-recommended action after failing to RTFM.
>
> Even running the autoconfig for X, if X is installed, and allowing a GUI
> login manager selection menu in the installer couldn't hurt. After all,
> if one bundles things like Gnome and KDE on distribution media, why not
> go the distance and give the option to do all the preliminary
> integration in the installer, if so selected?
>
> For example, I have no problem installing NetBSD, knowing that I first
> go to the utility menu and set up the NIC, then install, then say yes, I
> want those NIC settings to save some work, then do the reboots and set
> things up. Then I tweak more files and add software with pkgsrc.
>
> But that's extra work that FreeBSD already integrates to some extent
> into one installer session. Why not continue along that path? What about
> a menu that allows an expert mode for certain stages as well as just a
> default decision like "I want FreeBSD with KDE/Gnome." For example, if
> pdftk or ImageMagick blow up /var/tmp when batch converting or if
> OpenOffice takes about 9G to compile, then one could consider a resource
> needs database correlating to packages desired at install time. Given,
> that puts stress on the size of the image. It could also be a DVD-only
> option. One could select the ports that one would eventually like
> (perhaps like synaptic) and the needs could be anticipated for
> install-time FS-tuning. A subsequent option might allow installation via
> pkg_add or simply set up a script and notify root to run it in the
> background to fetch and install the desired packages at a later time.
>
> Such an approach would take the selection of distributions and packages
> to perhaps another level. Yes, it violates the "small is better" dictum
> but it also recognizes that the folks at the middle of the bell curve
> are great in number and short on technical mastery. The decision comes
> when the target market is determined.
>
> It would also give a certain "slick" factor. That might not always be
> good, but remembering old Amiga demos, I can hardly deny that eye candy
> and ease of use does attract. Part of the desktop thing for me is that I
> am partially blind and I find that Gnome is very friendly to my vision,
> or lack thereof. It causes much less eye strain than other desktops. So
> I like working from that environment for accessibility issues.
>
> I like the idea of a challenge and solving a problem. I like FreeBSD. I
> don't get off on messing with pixmaps, menus, MIME types and other
> mickey-mouse stuff. Requiring a certain standard of desktop integration
> by port maintainers, giving the option of a default look and feel and
> otherwise keeping things robust and packing more configuration steps
> into the installer would suit me fine.
>
> Charles
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-stable at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>


-- 
Subhro Kar
Security Engineer
iViZ Techno Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
Dhanshree Bldg, 1st Floor
Plot XI-16, Sector V
Salt Lake City
700091
India