GUI package management for FreeBSD
 

https://www.freebsdnews.com/2015/07/...kg-gui-pkg-ng/

The news starts with
Then introduces an Ubuntu Software-style GUI. I do not use FreeBSD, but if package management is quick and easy with the CLI, why the "need" for a pretty, but less powerful, GUI? Do the folks behind the project want FreeBSD to do to BSD what Ubuntu did to Linux?

(I feel like ranting today and this is as good an excuse as anything else.)

Must be one of those days... I have several unsatisfied rants pending already, but octo-BSD makes me just moan, uggghhh...

To put things into perspective:

1) He is not a FreeBSD developer
2) It is not a FreeBSD project
3) People can develop whatever they like
4) Others can choose to use it as they see fit
5) This is also a rant

It may be 'useful'/desirable/a nice toy for some of the desktop oriented FreeBSD derivatives.

Also one could easily argue that pkg_add, pkg_info, pkg_delete was sufficient and that pkgng just wasn't needed.

Amen brudda.

Well said, cynwulf.

Stop sucking up to cynwulf. :D :hattip:

Just a thought... Have you ever tried using a CLI on a tablet or smart phone?

Software doesn't just run on things with keyboards and mice anymore. ;)

Why would I want to use a telephone as a computer? The numbers on the keypad are too small. Typing messages is an arduous task that takes much longer than it should. More advanced tasks? Putting a web browser on a telephone does not make it a computer. Besides, the argument that an OS should be dumded down for the benefit of telephone users is not convincing.

what's the 'problem' with GUI's ???

There is nothing wrong with them. GUIs are good for some tasks, even required. CLI is better for other tasks. The problem is when some people believe very simple tasks that are easily and quickly done with CLI must be replaced with pretty GUIs.

My point was that FreeBSD, like Linux, will be used on more devices than traditional computers. Devices where "pretty GUIs" may be necessary to function at all. Just because YOU don't need it doesn't mean everyone else has no use for it. I for one, am not keen on using "pkg" from a Dualshock controller. I guess it's good then that Sony put a "pretty gui" for downloading software on my PS4.

I guess my point is along the lines of; what is the point of putting a computer operating system on a telephone? I am not referring to a simple OS that can browse the internet and store files. To me it makes more sense for a telephone to have an OS designed for it. Otherwise it is trying to put a square peg in a round hole. When a tool is made to perform a function, it does the job well. When a tool is designed to do several functions, it does several things, but does none of them well. To look at only two examples: the Swiss army knife and combination printer/photo copier/scanner/fax machines. If a telephone could do everything a computer can, installing a complete OS would make sense, but then there would still be the issue of different functionality (greatly different screen sizes and touch screen versus keyboard).

Your statement would be more accurate as "Just because YOU don't need it doesn't mean NO ONE else has use for it." There is always someone who needs, or believes he needs, something no one else does. It is foolish to modify a commonly used tool, appliance, whatever, to suit the needs of a few at the expense of almost everyone else. I know my opinion will anger many people on this board who believe the future has already arrived and telephones are replacing computers, but that is still a future vision.

So, do I need a GUI on my telephone? Yes. Do I need to install a computer operating system on my telephone? No.

Considering the adaptability of software, and that different code branches can be maintained, I don't see the problem. When I build a Linux kernel for the desktop I leave the "embedded" flag off, as well as the stuff for SoC configurations. They don't have to wreck the "massive smp" code to put embedded stuff in there.

Do you have FreeBSD installed on your smartphone/tablet?

But you can't really administer those devices at all...

Administering the software was carried out and completed before it was loaded onto your consumer device.

Ahem... well to get a GUI, you probably do need one. Even the most primitive phones actually have kind of microprocessor and an operating system of sorts.

I thought the original point here was about GUI administration tools? I find most of them useless, but I do think they have their place. In embedded systems there will be very basic tools to change basic settings, e.g. web based router configuration or Android's settings - but that is not system administration.

The fallacy is that GUI package management is actually useful, when in reality it isn't. It isn't secure either, but that's another story.

Packages should be installed from trusted sources and by the root user. GUI package management does not fit the concept well as the root user should not be using the GUI anyway and the user should not be installing packages...