Re: request: LOADER_ZFS_SUPPORT

On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Holger Kipp <hk_at_alogis.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 04:25:09PM +0200, Dan Naumov wrote:
>> 2009/11/18 O. Hartmann <ohartman_at_zedat.fu-berlin.de>:
>> > Gary Jennejohn wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:44:12 +0200
>> >> Dan Naumov <dan.naumov_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>> WHy not just build from source?
>> >>>
>> >>> Because expecting users to build from source to install or update
>> >>> their systems in the year 2009 is an outdated concept, this is why we
>> >>> have freebsd-update in the first place.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> This is such a load of BS I could fertilize 100 acres with it.
>> >>
>> >> In this day of inexpensive computers with fast mulit-core CPUs and
>> >> gigabytes of memory this argument is completely lame.
>> >>
>> >> Fifteen years ago I would have agreed, because it took days to build
>> >> world and the kernel.  Been there, done that.
>> >>
>> >> ---
>> >> Gary Jennejohn
>> >
>> > Been there, did it, too.
>> >
>> > Fools, conceptually compromised by Microsofts closed-binary-strategy, often
>> > complain about 'why compiling, it is an outdated concept ...'. It is, simply
>> > in my opinion, a helpless selfdefense: they do not understand much about
>> > operating systems (me, too) and never try to understand the concept behind
>> > (me not). But today, having sophisticated binary update facilities, it seems
>> > to speed up a worse development: many companies save the computer-scientist
>> > to maintain their stuff - because they have a bunch of cheap fools
>> > 'fertilizing the acres of foolsness' and pretending being the master of the
>> > puppets by hitting an 'update-key' and everythings works magically ...
>>
>> This is unreasonable elitism. Having to jump through hoops, manually
>
> Ah no. If someone needs a precompiled system with everything, he can go
> and use Windows or Linux. I prefer using *BSD _because_ I can compile
> everything from scratch. And the build-system usually works much better
> than many 'pre-compiled' binary systems on the market.

"Can" and "have to" are 2 very different things.

>> adjust Makefiles and spend time compiling just to apply a system
>> update does NOT make you a "guru". It makes you waste time that could
>> be better spent elsewhere.
>
> Usually adjusting Makefiles is not necessary, because the defaults are fine
> for most users. If you _need_ to adjust Makefiles, then a precompiled solution
> is definitely not suited to your needs. Trust me on that ;-)

Or maybe the defaults are suboptimal?


- Sincerely,
Dan Naumov