[PC-BSD Testing] samba module
doverosx at gmail.com
doverosx at gmail.com
Tue Jan 12 19:58:37 PST 2010
Stephan Assmus wrote:
> On 2010-01-12 at 18:34:58 [+0100], Mike Bybee <mbybee at dometrilogy.com>
>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Stephan Assmus <superstippi at gmx.de>
>>> 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
> 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,
> Testing mailing list
> Testing at lists.pcbsd.org
PC-BSD is "bringing" the desktop to the masses BSD-style. You could say
the goal is to provide a 'complete desktop operating system'. I think
the primary goal and it still is that as per the Warden and Inmates and
the ease at which VirtualBox installs, let's provide a GUI-based BSD so
other people are less afraid or what have you.
Stephan don't be afraid to voice your opinions, I thoroughly enjoy
discussions like this but I'm going to give you a run for your money ;).
More information about the Testing