On 9/13/07, Steve Shockley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bob Beck wrote: > >> As OpenBSD grows there simply is no reason, or logic to keeping > >> around such an archaic method of installation it now uses. > > > I await your diffs! Please feel free to write one that works, and > > fits on the install media for 10 architectures. > > I assume you're only encouraging this because it's likely impossible. > Frankly, I find the FreeBSD installer somewhat confusing. About the > only thing that would maybe make the OpenBSD installer simpler for new > (or impatient) users would be a "default" disk layout with sane > partition sizes for /, /tmp, /var, /usr, etc. Of course I rarely > install OpenBSD on non-x86 boxes but I'm sure sane defaults for x86 are > quite different than mac68k or hppa.
I've found times where a default layout would have been useful, but on the other hand I've been bitten more than once by a default layout (from the sysinstall [A]utomatic partitioner) that didn't set up a big enough /tmp for my needs. The result was spending extra time reinstalling to do it right the second time around. In almost all cases I think it's worth just being forced to think about my needs a bit more up front rather than trusting technology to do it for me. _Especially_ in cases where an autopartition scheme is involved (several OSes come to mind...) DS
