Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 13th Jan 2007 00:12 UTC, submitted by Charles A Landemaine
PC-BSD In his 'A week with...' series, Justin has used PC-BSD 1.3 this week and is sharing his experience. In other news, the PC-BSD team unveiled a sneak peek of the new look of the software installation wizard.
Thread beginning with comment 201569
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: some corrections
by molnarcs on Sun 14th Jan 2007 15:46 UTC in reply to "some corrections"
molnarcs
Member since:
2005-09-10

I agree with everything you said except this:

PC-BSD is first to use latest KDE and various technologies that is never used on FreeBSD and can help FreeBSD and KDE FreeBSD projects with testing...

On the contrary! PC-BSD uses only stuff already tested on FreeBSD - e.g updated KDE to 3.5.5 only after it was available in ports. In fact, that's where I would like to see some changes in PC-BSD. For instance, for months now, the xorg team of freebsd has been testing xorg 7.2rcX - and for the past 1 month, it has been working fairly well. PC-BSD could have tried adopting 7.2, then do a number of releases to help test (they specifically ask for testers), but went with 6.9 instead. I understand concerns about stability, but don't claim that PC-BSD helps testing new stuff in FreeBSD. It doesn't. (And there are some areas that it could: HSP's new USB stack, Ariff's work on multimedia, etc.).

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: some corrections
by antik on Sun 14th Jan 2007 16:35 in reply to "RE: some corrections"
antik Member since:
2006-05-19

On the contrary! PC-BSD uses only stuff already tested on FreeBSD - e.g updated KDE to 3.5.5 only after it was available in ports.

We got KDE 3.5.5 for our internal beta versions from development cvs repository long before it appeared in ports.

..but don't claim that PC-BSD helps testing new stuff in FreeBSD. It doesn't. (And there are some areas that it could: HSP's new USB stack, Ariff's work on multimedia, etc.).

You mean we should test new (alpha) features on our users? We bring FreeBSD for desktop users and your claim that we do nothing for testing new stuff is nonsense. If you think that we (PC-BSD Team) is sitting in cave and waiting for ports appear then you are wrong- we file bugreports and help troubleshoot many FreeBSD desktop specific bugs and of course we know about Xorg 7.2, DRM/DRI, about HALd disaster, current USB suckiness (sry, limitations/bugs), crippled features in KDE- broken by Linux oriented developers (NFS, Samba, CUPS...), ZFS, Gjournaling filesystem, MAC, etc...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: some corrections
by molnarcs on Sun 14th Jan 2007 16:58 in reply to "RE[2]: some corrections"
molnarcs Member since:
2005-09-10

You mean we should test new (alpha) features on our users?

Absolutely not. I talked about helping new features reach maturity faster. I didn't say you should dump new, untested features on your userbase in RELEASE - I refered to beta testing. Xorg is a good example: since 6.9 is well tested, you could try build it as per instructions on wikitest, and release 1.3 alpha, beta, etc. with that. If it doesn't work, you could have switched back to 6.9 for the RCs.

If you think that we (PC-BSD Team) is sitting in cave and waiting for ports appear then you are wrong-

That is exactly how it looks like from the outside.

we file bugreports and help troubleshoot many FreeBSD desktop specific bugs and of course we know about Xorg 7.2, DRM/DRI, about HALd disaster, current USB suckiness (sry, limitations/bugs), crippled features in KDE- broken by Linux oriented developers (NFS, Samba, CUPS...), ZFS, Gjournaling filesystem, MAC, etc...

Of course you know about it - I didn't say you don't know about it. I said that your claim that "PC-BSD is first to use latest KDE and various technologies that is never used on FreeBSD" is patently false. It is an overstatement. Exaggeration. And nothing you said disproves this. PC-BSD helps FreeBSD through exposing its desktop capabilities - but it is definitely not "first to use latest KDE and various technologies." You are dishonest if you claim otherwise. I never saw anything appear in PC-BSD before it was available in the official ports tree - nothing!

What I would like to see is more active participation in testing. Release early, release often, and include new technologies in alpha/beta releases (again, not in final versions!). Build new technologies with debug symbols, and provide users with the means to help file intelligent bug reports - that's what the project needs, and that is what, contrary to your claims, I haven't seen coming from PC-BSD. Or care to point out your bugreports/patches that helped stabilize HALd, Xorg, or any new technology?

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: some corrections
by molnarcs on Sun 14th Jan 2007 17:21 in reply to "RE[2]: some corrections"
molnarcs Member since:
2005-09-10

Just to make it clear: I don't have a problem with the way PC-BSD is developed. It just proves how good FreeBSD's architecture is: for instance, switching from 6.1 to 6.2 takes a few hours' work, and you can have an update ready in no time. Similarly, when KDE 3.5.5 was released to ports, it took only a few days to upgrade PC-BSD to use it. My gripe is with your statement that "PC-BSD is first to use latest KDE and various technologies that is never used on FreeBSD." Again, HALd is a good example: it has been supported on FreeBSD for some time now, but KDE support only arrived with 3.5.5. Until then, PC-BSD used a homegrown system to detect attached media, and switched to HALd only after it became available with KDE when the port was upgraded - and then you began bitching about the "HALd disaster"... you and others like this user: http://osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=16907&comment_id=200540

http://osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=16847&comment_id=197690

You did nothing to avoid that disaster by helping the KDE@freebsd team to solve them - which again, is not a problem in itself. I don't expect you to do that - unless you make claims about the tremendous contributions you provide to the FreeBSD project.

Reply Parent Score: 4