Le Monday 07 July 2003 23:53, M. L. Dodson a écrit : > > That certainly makes sense. I might gently suggest to RE, etc > that they might want to reconsider the decision to put nfs on the > extra drivers floppy (I assume that is where it is). This really > trips up newbies (and some of us not so newbies). I ran across > this trying to help someone install 5.0 for the first time. He > had a bunch of machines to install (no cdroms), so I suggested > nfs and was completely surprised when it did not work. I > verified that he was not doing something obviously wrong before I > posted. He was very confused because he consulted essentially > all the FreeBSD books that had anything to say on the subject and > could not see what he was doing wrong (nor did I). > > This does not present a good first impression for the project. > > The nfs install, being documented in all the books, is much more > important than individual ethernet drivers. If nfs cannot be put > in the install kernel, then the nfs option should be removed from > sysinstall. All this IMO, of course. > > Bud Dodson Hello, I would not be as harsh as your comment : FreeBSD 5.x is still the experimental branch and the NFS install of 4.8 is painless. 5.1 is mainly for the early adopters, and these should expect having quite a bit of debugging, especially in "exotic" setups (this should be expected for a "user-supported" OS - and I do not want to go back to even RedTrap Linux). It seems the Internet bubble crash has had a very bad impact on the "human resources" available for the project, and it shows (the introduction of new features is perhaps slower ?). try sending a problem report cheers TfHReceived on Mon Jul 07 2003 - 19:49:31 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:14 UTC