implemented features (Re: Decision time....)

[Bill Hacker]

Erik Wikström wrote:
On 2007-06-06 01:33, Bill Hacker wrote:
*trimmed*

Whatever the direction is to be, having a solid kernel and core is far 
more important that a slick installer to put in place a 'still needs 
work' OS.
So true, a lot of people complain about OpenBSD's installer because it 
is the way it is. But I don't see the problem, there are excellent 
guides available and you only install once so even if the installer is 
not the best it's not something you have to live with day in and day 
out.
Actually it may well be (day in day out).

One often returns to either the FreeBSD 'sysinstal' or, for example Vector Linux 
similar toolset for a good deal of maintenance, months or years after an initial 
install.

That because - perfect or not - they are *familiar* and provide a bit more in 
the way of clues and cues for things we may not do often enough to otherwise 
remember well.

The current sysinstall must be around 8 to 10 years in use w/o major change?

I personally can't DO a DFLY install without FreeBSD sysinstall close to hand, 
simply because I am too lazy to set up the drives, slices, partitions, boot 
manager any other way. And there are a 'lot' of those in my systems.

Same again when setting up Linux, Syllable, Plan9, Minix.

Sometimes I just need it for 'inspaction'.

Comfort & trust. 'Old pair of shoes' syndrome.

> The kernel on the other hand must be stable since you'll be using
it every minute of the time you are running the system.

Spot on!

Bill