Weird entry in ISO
tomas.bodzar at gmail.com
Fri Sep 24 09:34:47 PDT 2010
2010/9/24 PrzemysÅaw PaweÅczyk <pp_o2 at o2.pl>:
> On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 17:06:40 +0200
> Tomas Bodzar <tomas.bodzar at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Â Â Â Not at all - just because these tools are not in the base
>> >> system does not mean they're not easily available just install them
>> >> with pkg_radd or pkgin or build them yourself
>> >> (cd /usr/pkgsrc/sysutils/mc; bmake install clean clean-depends).
>> > Let me show you a real example, I did stuck with no network
>> > during installation. DF is new to me. Unix commands like dhclient
>> > are not available though paths so I had to find it. The DF tree is
>> > different from other systems.
>> If you will read first before doing something then you will find this
>> page http://www.dragonflybsd.org/docs/newhandbook/Installation/ where
>> is even description how to enable network after install.
> If you read first before doing something then you would find that I
> got stuck before installation - I just inserted CD, kick off DF
> and... opsys was in memory but it ended up without IP.
So checking in dmesg if LAN interface was detected or reboot to your
original OS and
>> DF tree is not so different from that one in OpenBSD. You can read man
>> page (which has same name as in OpenBSD) here too
> Thank you. The permeation of BSD flavors is unprecedented, isn't
> it? ;-)
Mmm I hope that there will not be more and more diferences like in Linux :-)
>> > Using MC I get broader picture of system dir layout and their
>> > contents
>> > - I get two panes with a lot of information - and I am not coerced
>> > to wander thru subdirectories typing cd and ls like idiot (not as
>> > bad as I would be getting acquainted with DF bowels but MC is more
>> > convenient).
>> I don't like MC. I prefer simple terminal with tmux(1) and couple of
>> commands like ls(1) and similar. If I need explorer-like then I'm
>> using xfe. And what? It's my choice. It doesn't need to be same for
>> all. MC is not a holly cow of Unix.
> xfe w/o X?
I did not say if with or without X ;-) Anyway ls, cp, cat, vi, more
and others are still here and in combination with tmux it's superb
enough. Of course for me. Can't talk for others.
>> > I didn't say about packages but about sets:
>> > http://ftp.bytemine.net/pub/OpenBSD/4.7/amd64/
>> > What about DF basic system software divided into sets similar to
>> > sets found in OpenBSD?
>> And why? Because everything must be as in OpenBSD? Hint: My only OS is
>> OpenBSD, but I like a lot of features in Dfly and a way of its
>> developers in some areas.
> I thought "because OpenBSD sets were good solution". Period. If DF
> takes from other BSDs, why not in this point?
Maybe because they can't see point in this or don't have time for
this? I really don't know.
>> And yes, lynx in OpenBSD base install is fine, but they have much more
>> developers and money from users so if you want it in Dfly then pay
>> someone or do it yourself or more simple - said in OpenBSD way - shut
>> up or hack ;-)
> At last! At least one user agreeing with me. :-)
> Sometimes I feel like there was another adage - "use it or ditch it
> (and get lost)". Just another rude expression dressed in smiley.
It wasn't meant as something rude ;-) It's just fact. Communities are
smaller around OpenBSD or Dfly, but I think that much more useful and
I can see thanks to my own use that approach in OpenBSD community
leads to quality so no problem with that for me.
> PrzemysÅaw PaweÅczyk (P2O2) [pron. Pshemislav Paveltchick]
> http://pp.blast.pl, pp_o2 at o2.pl
âIf youâre good at something, never do it for free.âÂ âThe Joker
More information about the Users