Richard Rauch <rauch@rice.edu> wrote:
 
> XFree86 configuration probably isn't going to be a major hurdle.  I don't
> know if the auto-configuration is anywhere near reliable enough to count
> on it from sysinst, but it certainly could make life easier for many
> end-users.
> 
> I don't care for the idea of tying KDE too closely to NetBSD.  I'd also be
> leery of accidentally creating the impression that NetBSD endorses KDE, or
> has integrated it, or that it is ``the'' way that people should use X on
> NetBSD.

Agreed - the only problem I see with this is that *if* you set up X per
default, you have to select _a_ windowmanager to be the default.  This
will become the windowmanager that -- as people conceive it -- NetBSD
"supports" or "comes with".

Even if you offer the user a choice, you get into an area that requires
certain knowledge from the end-user (difference between KDE, GNOME,
$WindowManager, what a windowmanager is in contrast to a DE etc), and
you still need to default to something.

If you default to something like twm, Blackbox or WindowMaker, people
will call it "user-unfriendly" - if you default to GNOME or KDE you get
all the baggage it comes with and NetBSD is identified with that
environment.  Neither is an optimal solution. 

-Jan

-- 
finger jschauma@netmeister.org
Please do not CC me when replying to messages on a Mailing List.
See Mail-Followup-To header (above) and
http://www.google.com/search?q=Mail-Followup-To+Header