[PC-BSD Testing] samba module

Stephan Assmus superstippi at gmx.de
Tue Jan 12 11:31:03 PST 2010


Hi,

On 2010-01-12 at 18:34:58 [+0100], Mike Bybee <mbybee at dometrilogy.com> 
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Stephan Assmus <superstippi at gmx.de> 
> wrote:
> > Yes, unlike "Linux", FreeBSD is a complete operating system - if you 
> > consider text-based "complete" (I don't mean to imply anything here).
> >
> That's an interesting comment - why would an operating system need an 
> integrated X11/Aqua/Windows style GUI? I think by and large, the majority 
> of operating systems do not actually have an integrated GUI like that... 
> in fact, Linux certainly doesn't (hence the ability to swap out 
> X11/Xorg/etc) nor does OSX (since I can do much the same there). I think 
> only a few like Menuet and Windows Vista onwards have this.
> 
> Not being critical, but it certainly is a very different way to look at 
> an OS than I'm used to (especially since I run typically almost entirely 
> text only, using a GUI only for Firefox, Rhythmbox, RDC, and tons of 
> terminal sessions really)

The question what is considered a complete system is very interesting for 
the point we are discussing. The FreeBSD team stresses it very much that 
FreeBSD is a complete system. The argument has been brought up again in 
this thread, when someone mentioned that "BSD is architected, not 
composited."

My point exactly is that PC-BSD, unlike its FreeBSD foundation, is 
composited. And therefor it has the problems that come with that.

So we all being interested in PC-BSD, we cannot honestly use that argument 
anymore. Why would you not care about the graphical desktop and consider it 
outside the scope of a "complete operating system"? That's exaclty what 
PC-BSD is trying to provide, is it not? (The fact that the new PC-BSD 
offers to install plain FreeBSD doesn't really fit my argument. :-)

You probably have to view my argumentation in the context that I am trying 
to help create such a "complete" operating system where the argumentation 
of FreeBSD being "designed" rather than "composited" extends to the 
graphical user interface.

Until very recently, I have not felt the advantage that the Haiku project 
has here as strongly as I do now. But don't mistake any of what I say for 
disrespect for the hard work you guys are doing. In fact, I have great 
respect and admire many of the results.

I have never before been on any testing mailing list for a distribution 
about to do their next release, so when I saw a couple suggestions to turn 
stuff off that doesn't work, and after having tried a number of projects 
and faced various problems that probably resulted from turning stuff off or 
being otherwise unable to do something about bugs in other project's code, 
it just prompted me to say something. In the Haiku project, we really just 
delay the release when something doesn't work. Although I must admit we 
also turned stuff off at one occasion :-). But that was the Firewire driver 
which had no front-end to be useful anyway.

Best regards,
-Stephan


More information about the Testing mailing list