Checkbox for "Install Everything"

[Sebastian Gurovich]

How do the Ubuntu people get around this problem of conflicts with the
install everything button option? I understand they have just an
extended amount of packages if not more, is this correct? One more
thing? How are they able to include proprietary software? Does the end
user end up paying for the proprietary software? I'm confused because
from what I heard they offer a program to send the installation
software via snail mail free?

Any ideas?

-

On 5/21/07, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote:
> Mauriat M wrote:
> > On 5/21/07, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Tim wrote:
> >> > On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 20:51 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> >> >> Suppose you were building a machine that more than one programmer
> >> >> would use, along with typical office stuff...  What would you include
> >> >> to keep them from wasting hours of time or calling you in the middle
> >> >> of the night to install something they need.
> >> >
> >> > I would think any programmer that required outside help to install
> >> stuff
> >> > that ordinary semi-competent users can manage to install without
> >> outside
> >> > help is a hopelessly incompetent person to have as a programmer.
> >>
> >> I take it you don't understand the concept of multiuser machines where
> >> users don't have the root password.  You know - the environment unix was
> >> designed for...
> >>
> >
> > In the case of multi-user machines, if one particular user is a
> > programmer and another something else, accountant, designer (or
> > whatever) then their *administrators* should accommodate that. If
> > administrators do not know how to support what their users require
> > then no "Install Everything" button can help them.
>
> Why would you expect a local administrator to know more about what will
> be useful within a new distribution than the people who chose it's
> contents?  I'd prefer the expert opinion.  If you are expecting a
> machine administrator to know more about programming than a programmer
> or to be able to tell a programmer what to do, I think you are confused.
>
> > As for the original comment, it seemed clear (to me) that Tim was
> > referring to someone who installed Linux on their own for software
> > development.
>
> Yes, people seem to be brainwashed into the Microsoft way of thinking
> that everyone needs their own copy of everything.  Unix was designed to
> work well while you share resources and cooperate easily, and Linux
> inherits that design.  However the real driving force for individual
> PC's replacing the old mainframes was that administrators did not
> provide what the users needed in a timely fashion.  We don't have to
> repeat that mistake.
>
> --
>    Les Mikesell
>     lesmikesell at gmail.com
>
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list at redhat.com
> To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>