Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 07:57:22AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote: we don't need real developing in b-f. B-f should only a fall back for sarge, if d-i is not ready. I suppose it was a while ago now, but it's still a bit sad that people are forgetting this is _exactly_ what we were saying for woody. b-f's as a fallback doesn't work, it's too thorougly unmaintainable. Or installation system needs _major_ work, easy solutions like just fall back to boot-floppies *don't* work. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/ I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.'' msg21034/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 05:17:42PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 07:57:22AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote: we don't need real developing in b-f. B-f should only a fall back for sarge, if d-i is not ready. I suppose it was a while ago now, but it's still a bit sad that people are forgetting this is _exactly_ what we were saying for woody. I know this. b-f's as a fallback doesn't work, it's too thorougly unmaintainable. Or installation system needs _major_ work, easy solutions like just fall back to boot-floppies *don't* work. If we don't add new architecture and new features, it should work. If someone like new features (LVM etc.), if someone like a new architecture (Hurd, BSD, ...), if someone like some other improvments, they all should work on d-i. I hope we get d-i stable and I hope we can use it with sarge. But we/you should not wait for d-i a long time and delay the sarge release. Stop _developing_ on b-f. But find some debian maintainer (like Edward) who _maintain_ b-f for some time. Gruss Grisu -- Michael Bramer - a Debian Linux Developer http://www.debsupport.de PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Linux Sysadmin -- Use Debian Linux Wer in Reih und Glied marschiert, hat bereits meine Verachtung verdient -- Albert Einstein... So let's install Linux! msg21040/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 05:17:42PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: I suppose it was a while ago now, but it's still a bit sad that people are forgetting this is _exactly_ what we were saying for woody. Of course we didn't actually do that for woody. We changed a whole heck of a lot in b-f, moved to isolinux on the cd's, etc. -- Mike Stone -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] immo vero scripsit: b-f's as a fallback doesn't work, it's too thorougly unmaintainable. Or installation system needs _major_ work, easy solutions like just fall back to boot-floppies *don't* work. It's quite interesting that you insist on b-f being so unmaintainable when you don't seem to be involved with boot-floppies. It's not that bad. :P It has (somewhat) working i18n, and somewhat works on most arches. At least we could release woody. I've got an impression that we will hopefully be able to integrate most of what is done on d-i to b-f. Even if it meant we will only be reusing kernel.sh and the installation docs. We don't want to just throw away the translations that was done for b-f, if that means anything. Of course, babbling about it on the list is not useful. Get back to hacking... regards, junichi -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] : Junichi Uekawa http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer GPG Fingerprint : 17D6 120E 4455 1832 9423 7447 3059 BF92 CD37 56F4 Libpkg-guide: http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 11:46:37PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] immo vero scripsit: b-f's as a fallback doesn't work, it's too thorougly unmaintainable. Or installation system needs _major_ work, easy solutions like just fall back to boot-floppies *don't* work. It's quite interesting that you insist on b-f being so unmaintainable when you don't seem to be involved with boot-floppies. It's not that bad. :P It's a lot worse when you have to care about it working on non-i386. But hey, whatever. Obviously there's no value in my or Adam's experiences with trying to make a release with boot-floppies. Please, knock yourselves out. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/ I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.'' msg21053/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
#include hallo.h
Anthony Towns wrote on Tue Jul 23, 2002 um 08:33:55PM:
You can propose whatever you like, but the above is sadly deluded. From
experience, getting b-f's updated and ported to the existing architectures
takes between 8 and 12 months.
We won't be freezing until we have a satisfactory and functioning
installer.
Nice. I have seen how motivation disappears when you are waiting longer
than 8 months for the next _freeze_. I expect that the whole thing will
slow down and we really won't get a stable installer until one year is
passed.
You're welcome to try to prove that this isn't the case, but everyone
else has seen the way b-f's work a few times now, so don't expect anyone
to believe your claims until you /have/ proved them.
This is not a proof, but a speculation. Only the time will prove. But I
think that this is exactly this attitude that caused the fucking long
release period of Woody. And you are continuing working the same way.
Gruss/Regards,
Eduard.
--
#!/usr/bin/perl -w -- sequences
$0=++$|;for(;;){print-length$0;$0=~s/(.)\1*/$1.length$/ge;}print\n;
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Wed, Jul 24, 2002 at 12:22:34PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote: Anthony Towns wrote on Tue Jul 23, 2002 um 08:33:55PM: We won't be freezing until we have a satisfactory and functioning installer. Nice. I have seen how motivation disappears when you are waiting longer than 8 months for the next _freeze_. That's nice. You realise our actual freeze this time round lasted less than three months, and most of that was due to the security problem which we should've known about earlier, and which we won't have to implement again, right? Only the time will prove. But I think that this is exactly this attitude that caused the fucking long release period of Woody. And you are continuing working the same way. One of the nice things about Debian is that you can do just about whatever you damn well please no matter what anyone says. If you can convince people that there's a better way of getting sarge out the door than my way, and if you're right, then that's what'll happen. But you don't convince people by speculation. In short, stop ranting at everyone working on d-i, and prove to them that b-f really can do the job better, by *making* it do the job better. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/ I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.'' msg21011/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 01:12:24AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: * Eduard Bloch | #include hallo.h | Tollef Fog Heen wrote on Wed Jul 17, 2002 um 09:25:19AM: | | Are you, or somebody else ready to continue developing b-f? Note, | _developing_, not maintaining. I am not willing to do that. I want | to make d-i happen, however. | | What do you understand under developing? Adding support for EVMS, LVM, the Hurd, *BSD as a start. Add various frontends to it -- both text-only and GUI ones. I don't think you can reasonably do that within todays boot-floppies. we don't need real developing in b-f. B-f should only a fall back for sarge, if d-i is not ready. Please don't add new features like LVM etc. to b-f. Maybe fix some bugs (like the language chooser). The Hurt and BSD people should work with d-i and make improvments on this development (and not on b-f). Use it only as fall back. | It does what it has been designed for. it hasn't been designed. maybe, but it work and you get a debian system running. Without hardware detection, without real language support, without LVM, without GUI, ... but it work. You get debian and it is easy. Gruss Grisu -- Michael Bramer - a Debian Linux Developer http://www.debsupport.de PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Linux Sysadmin -- Use Debian Linux BSD - Wenn Ihr Linux-Root nach dem Sandmännchen schon ins Bett musste... -- Juergen Ernst Guenther msg21033/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Tue, Jul 23, 2002 at 01:16:29AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote: I propose that we use what we have and do not try to force _new and untested_ code to replace BFs. IMHO, either we base on boot-floppies and freeze in few months, You can propose whatever you like, but the above is sadly deluded. From experience, getting b-f's updated and ported to the existing architectures takes between 8 and 12 months. We won't be freezing until we have a satisfactory and functioning installer. You're welcome to try to prove that this isn't the case, but everyone else has seen the way b-f's work a few times now, so don't expect anyone to believe your claims until you /have/ proved them. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/ I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.'' msg20978/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On 16 Jul 2002 17:09:25 +0200 Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: other arches like mips, mipsel, hppa, s390, arm etc will have to be taken care of by people who know those arches. The same goes for our Hurd and *BSD people -- if you want to release with woody + 1, you will have to have a working installation system. I wish to remind people that Lilo (aka Rob Levin) has made me custodian over a pair of HPPA machines that he was made custodian over, for use in the free software community. There's also a big monitor. If they can be useful, I'm in the San Fran Bay Area, and someone who is actively working on HPPA arch for debian can have them. I don't know anything about them, other than what lilo told me, one part of which was if you want to do something serious with them, you need to attach a scsi cdrom drive to (one of) them. They run HPUX atm. There is a very large monitor in the pile. -- Tollef Fog Heen,''`. UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' : -Jim -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Tue, 16 Jul 2002 14:30:15 +0200 Eduard Bloch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: #include hallo.h Greetings :) Anthony Towns wrote on Tue Jul 16, 2002 um 04:53:26PM: We can stick with boot-floppies for Woody+1 and release Debian-4.0 with DI ;) From what I have read of the difficulties of dealing with BF, I gather that people do not want to deal with it. They want it -gone-. -Forever-. No, no we can't. You like argumenting with semi-technical reasons - so which one is it this time? Good grief, you _weren't_ joking? Nope. The smiley was for Debian-4.0. If we cannot guarantee stable DI in appropriate time, the whole distribution should not wait for it. Remember that people are volunteering their time to put into debian. Originally, I wouldn't think I would have to put this reminder in, but the statement above suggests otherwise. As intimated above, I gather working on boot-floppies is difficult and frustrating: takes long to build, once it is built, changing the result is only possible through the application of another build, and requires people to think really hard about how to make the change given the addonitis which boot-floppies has caught, and given the needs other developers have for initial debian installs. (Example of need, busybox, perl, bash). So, in summary, I gather that continuing to work on boot-floppies is inefficient and not sufficiently contributory. Sure, you'd get a result, but how much work would be necessary to obtain it? Given the volunteer nature of debian development, you shouldn't blame anyone for outright refusing to work under these conditions, and if they do, you owe them many beers and dinners, given the existance of a more efficient mode of (co)operation. (again, on a voluntary basis... if it's decided, forexample, that the work is satisfactory and contributory by all concerned, dinner n a beer could be foregone in light of the collaborative contribution.) Gruss/Regards, Eduard. -Jim -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
#include hallo.h Tollef Fog Heen wrote on Mon Jul 22, 2002 um 01:12:24AM: * Eduard Bloch | #include hallo.h | Tollef Fog Heen wrote on Wed Jul 17, 2002 um 09:25:19AM: | | Are you, or somebody else ready to continue developing b-f? Note, | _developing_, not maintaining. I am not willing to do that. I want | to make d-i happen, however. | | What do you understand under developing? Adding support for EVMS, LVM, the Hurd, *BSD as a start. Add various LVM can be added. EVMS has AFAIK still some stability issues and does not have any pvmove equivalent feature. frontends to it -- both text-only and GUI ones. GUI gives only some cosmetical value, pointed out several times. I don't think you can reasonably do that within todays boot-floppies. GUI? No. But is this the only thing that D-I is good for? | It does what it has been designed for. it hasn't been designed. It does what it has been written for. | d-i does not require large media either. (Or rather, it does today, | but that can be fixed if anybody cares enough. And do we know how | many actually install base from floppies?) | | But more RAM. not necessarily. But mostly. Gruss/Regards, Eduard. -- netzwurm was is eigentlich so geil an grub? formorer grub bootet alles was nicht schnell genug wegläuft -- #debian.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
* Eduard Bloch | LVM can be added. EVMS has AFAIK still some stability issues and does | not have any pvmove equivalent feature. and you are saying LVM does not have stability issues? Where were you wrt LVM about beginning of May? | frontends to it -- both text-only and GUI ones. | | GUI gives only some cosmetical value, pointed out several times. no, it doesn't. The current interface scares off users. | I don't think you can reasonably do that within todays boot-floppies. | | GUI? No. But is this the only thing that D-I is good for? As I wrote: for a start. Add autodetection of hardware, autopartition, unattended installs, tighter integration with debconf. Also, how are you going to add support for *BSD in b-f? | | It does what it has been designed for. | | it hasn't been designed. | | It does what it has been written for. yes, but today's requirements are different. | | But more RAM. | | not necessarily. | | But mostly. parse error. -- Tollef Fog Heen,''`. UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' : `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
* Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-07-22 10:58]: Also, how are you going to add support for *BSD in b-f? That's not relevant since *BSD won't release with sarge anyway. -- Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
* Martin Michlmayr | * Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-07-22 10:58]: | Also, how are you going to add support for *BSD in b-f? | | That's not relevant since *BSD won't release with sarge anyway. But our Hurd friends might. and it seems to me like Eduard Bloch is proposing that we extend b-f indefinitely, something which I hope I have misunderstood him on. -- Tollef Fog Heen,''`. UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' : `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
#include hallo.h Tollef Fog Heen wrote on Mon Jul 22, 2002 um 02:45:43PM: | That's not relevant since *BSD won't release with sarge anyway. But our Hurd friends might. and it seems to me like Eduard Bloch is proposing that we extend b-f indefinitely, something which I hope I have misunderstood him on. I propose that we use what we have and do not try to force _new and untested_ code to replace BFs. IMHO, either we base on boot-floppies and freeze in few months, or we insist on forcing D-I for Sarge, leading to whacky release period of (let's say) another two years. Gruss/Regards, Eduard. -- [Microsoft wirbt:] Ein offenes Betriebssystem kann schon mal mutieren. Mutieren tun vor allem MS-proprietäre Dateiformate. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
* Eduard Bloch | #include hallo.h | Tollef Fog Heen wrote on Wed Jul 17, 2002 um 09:25:19AM: | | Are you, or somebody else ready to continue developing b-f? Note, | _developing_, not maintaining. I am not willing to do that. I want | to make d-i happen, however. | | What do you understand under developing? Adding support for EVMS, LVM, the Hurd, *BSD as a start. Add various frontends to it -- both text-only and GUI ones. I don't think you can reasonably do that within todays boot-floppies. | It does what it has been designed for. it hasn't been designed. | d-i does not require large media either. (Or rather, it does today, | but that can be fixed if anybody cares enough. And do we know how | many actually install base from floppies?) | | But more RAM. not necessarily. -- Tollef Fog Heen,''`. UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' : `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
* Richard Hirst | Current status is that it can handle msdos and gpt table creation, and | partition creation and deletion. Tested only on ia64. Not touched it | since March, but I can certainly make the code available. yes please. -- Tollef Fog Heen,''`. UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' : `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
* Eduard Bloch | Why not? It works. It is available and stable. It is smart. It does not | require large media or network connection to load even the installation | subsystem. Are you, or somebody else ready to continue developing b-f? Note, _developing_, not maintaining. I am not willing to do that. I want to make d-i happen, however. d-i does not require large media either. (Or rather, it does today, but that can be fixed if anybody cares enough. And do we know how many actually install base from floppies?) -- Tollef Fog Heen,''`. UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' : `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Tue, 2002-07-16 at 21:17, Richard Hirst wrote: Current status is that it can handle msdos and gpt table creation, and partition creation and deletion. Tested only on ia64. Not touched it since March, but I can certainly make the code available. That would be cool, please do. I see there are two more parted-based things in CVS, too: partkit and autopartkit. Both of these seem to use debconf to do their UI. p. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 09:21:51AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: * Richard Hirst | Current status is that it can handle msdos and gpt table creation, and | partition creation and deletion. Tested only on ia64. Not touched it | since March, but I can certainly make the code available. yes please. ftp://ftp.parisc-linux.org/src/cparted/ Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 07:24:11PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote: Why not? It works. Knock yourself out. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/ I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.'' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
#include hallo.h Tollef Fog Heen wrote on Wed Jul 17, 2002 um 09:25:19AM: Are you, or somebody else ready to continue developing b-f? Note, _developing_, not maintaining. I am not willing to do that. I want to make d-i happen, however. What do you understand under developing? It does what it has been designed for. I played with the idea of extending it with LVM management, when I have more time. And, of course, I would maintain b-f as long as needed. d-i does not require large media either. (Or rather, it does today, but that can be fixed if anybody cares enough. And do we know how many actually install base from floppies?) But more RAM. Gruss/Regards, Eduard. -- Expect the unexpected and expect the expected to be late. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 06:03:38PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote: #include hallo.h Anthony Towns wrote on Tue Jul 16, 2002 um 01:39:21AM: We can stick with boot-floppies for Woody+1 and release Debian-4.0 with DI ;) No, no we can't. You like argumenting with semi-technical reasons - so which one is it this time? Good grief, you _weren't_ joking? Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/ I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.'' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Tue, 2002-07-16 at 05:49, Timshel Knoll wrote: The bigger issue is that parted is very strict about the partition tables it reads, so parted will not work well with inconsistent / dodgy partition tables which may have been caused by other programs. The ability to resize filesystems in the installer would be _very_ cool, however, but there may need to be a fallback method to normal fdisk ... That seems rather unfortunate. Is there nothing that can be done to make parted more tolerant of dodgy partition tables? A fallback to fdisk would be possible, but that's something we would want to avoid if it's at all feasible to do so, both from a standpoint of reducing the amount of code that has to be shipped with the installer, and providing a consistent user experience. p. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
#include hallo.h Anthony Towns wrote on Tue Jul 16, 2002 um 04:53:26PM: We can stick with boot-floppies for Woody+1 and release Debian-4.0 with DI ;) No, no we can't. You like argumenting with semi-technical reasons - so which one is it this time? Good grief, you _weren't_ joking? Nope. The smiley was for Debian-4.0. If we cannot guarantee stable DI in appropriate time, the whole distribution should not wait for it. Gruss/Regards, Eduard. -- Anwender1: Mein WIN95 ist in 6 Monaten noch NIE abgestürzt... Anwender2: Ein halbes Jahr ohne Strom - das ist hart! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 02:30:15PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote: #include hallo.h Anthony Towns wrote on Tue Jul 16, 2002 um 04:53:26PM: We can stick with boot-floppies for Woody+1 and release Debian-4.0 with DI ;) No, no we can't. You like argumenting with semi-technical reasons - so which one is it this time? Good grief, you _weren't_ joking? Nope. The smiley was for Debian-4.0. If we cannot guarantee stable DI in appropriate time, the whole distribution should not wait for it. For the installer, porting is a major effort, because architectural differences are greatest when dealing with the hardware at a low level such as during partitioning/booting. i386 is the _best_-understood. Then once you get something done, you also have to get it documented and translated. I think for woody+1 we could have other options available on an experimental basis, but that b-f would be our recommendation for those that d-i doesn't work for (which could be quite a few). -- *--v- Installing Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 v--* | http://www.debian.org/releases/woody/installmanual | | debian-imac (potato): http://debian-imac.sourceforge.net | |Chris Tillman[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | May the Source be with you | ** -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 10:36:11AM +0100, Philip Blundell wrote: On Tue, 2002-07-16 at 05:49, Timshel Knoll wrote: The bigger issue is that parted is very strict about the partition tables it reads, so parted will not work well with inconsistent / dodgy partition tables which may have been caused by other programs. The ability to resize filesystems in the installer would be _very_ cool, however, but there may need to be a fallback method to normal fdisk ... That seems rather unfortunate. Is there nothing that can be done to make parted more tolerant of dodgy partition tables? A fallback to fdisk would be possible, but that's something we would want to avoid if it's at all feasible to do so, both from a standpoint of reducing the amount of code that has to be shipped with the installer, and providing a consistent user experience. p. Wouldn't it be possible to write an API to fdisk so we could fall back to it underneath without affecting the presentation? -- *--v- Installing Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 v--* | http://www.debian.org/releases/woody/installmanual | | debian-imac (potato): http://debian-imac.sourceforge.net | |Chris Tillman[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | May the Source be with you | ** -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
* Eduard Bloch | Nope. The smiley was for Debian-4.0. If we cannot guarantee stable DI in | appropriate time, the whole distribution should not wait for it. We can't guarantee anything, but we _will_ have a stable d-i in appropriate time. We _must_ have a stable d-i in time. The alternative is PGI (or both). Not b-f. -- Tollef Fog Heen,''`. UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' : `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
* Chris Tillman | For the installer, porting is a major effort, because architectural | differences are greatest when dealing with the hardware at a low level | such as during partitioning/booting. i386 is the _best_-understood. True. Help for other architectures is appreciated, and needed. After my vacation is over (sometime in August), I'll hopefully have a working i386 installer and begin getting this working on sparc. Apart from that, I have an old Quadra 700 which I might play around with, but that is _not_ a priority for me ATM. (Since I don't have the right cable to network it.) it would be nice if somebody started working on getting d-i to work on ppc, for instance. I don't think I can get my hands on recent ppc hardware, and creating an installation system on a system which requires a linuxppc cd in order to boot is doomed. :) other arches like mips, mipsel, hppa, s390, arm etc will have to be taken care of by people who know those arches. The same goes for our Hurd and *BSD people -- if you want to release with woody + 1, you will have to have a working installation system. | Then once you get something done, you also have to get it documented | and translated. Development docs are actually written as we go. Translations and user docs are absolutely needed, but impossible to do at this point. -- Tollef Fog Heen,''`. UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' : `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Tue, 2002-07-16 at 15:05, Chris Tillman wrote: Wouldn't it be possible to write an API to fdisk so we could fall back to it underneath without affecting the presentation? Sure, it would be possible, but it's gonna be a chunk of extra work. I would much rather put the effort into making parted acceptable as the sole partitioning program. p. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm expecting some working installation systems (PGI, d-i, whatever) within a couple of months... (i386 only, and other limitations, sure, but working nevertheless) PGI works now. As for parted's stability, we have been using it since Progeny Debian, and have never had stability or reliability problems. The only problem we did have was the old release we shipped with Progeny Debian was very picky about partition tables. It could not read tables created by Windows ME and some tables even from other GNU/Linux installers. These problems have since been addressed, and we have had zero problems with parted in PGI. -- Eric Gillespie * [EMAIL PROTECTED] Software Developer Progeny Linux Systems - http://progeny.com/ When everyone has to reinvent the wheel, many people invent square wheels. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
#include hallo.h Tollef Fog Heen wrote on Tue Jul 16, 2002 um 04:58:19PM: | Nope. The smiley was for Debian-4.0. If we cannot guarantee stable DI in | appropriate time, the whole distribution should not wait for it. We can't guarantee anything, but we _will_ have a stable d-i in appropriate time. We _must_ have a stable d-i in time. The alternative is PGI (or both). Not b-f. Why not? It works. It is available and stable. It is smart. It does not require large media or network connection to load even the installation subsystem. Gruss/Regards, Eduard. -- My growing impression of C++, object-oriented programming, etc., is that it attempts to allow programmers to conveniently reuse their mistakes. -- Stephen Uitti -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 10:43:00AM -0500, Eric Gillespie wrote: Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm expecting some working installation systems (PGI, d-i, whatever) within a couple of months... (i386 only, and other limitations, sure, but working nevertheless) PGI works now. As for parted's stability, we have been using it since Progeny Debian, and have never had stability or reliability problems. The only problem we did have was the old release we shipped with Progeny Debian was very picky about partition tables. It could not read tables created by Windows ME and some tables even from other GNU/Linux installers. These problems have since been addressed, and we have had zero problems with parted in PGI. Umm, I know Jimmy Kaplowski filed a bug which we worked around, and I've seen some problems on powerpc. Zero is a bit less than true. -- *--v- Installing Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 v--* | http://www.debian.org/releases/woody/installmanual | | debian-imac (potato): http://debian-imac.sourceforge.net | |Chris Tillman[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | May the Source be with you | ** -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Mon, 2002-07-15 at 00:58, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: in order to get debian-installer into working shape, it is obvious that the user has some way to partition the hard drive. An auto-partitioner will probably only need debconf as it's UI. However, manual partitioning using debconf will be very painful. Developing a debconf partitioning widget might be a little overkill, so I am not sure how we want to solve this challenge. Ah, I just noticed that there is already a newt-based parted frontend (nparted), which will do for dialog mode. The standard parted should suffice for readline mode; I think it should be easy enough to put together something in Gtk for gnome mode, plus a shell script to multiplex the three of them based on $DEBIAN_FRONTEND, and we should be all set. p. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
#include hallo.h Philip Blundell wrote on Tue Jul 16, 2002 um 09:03:29PM: Ah, I just noticed that there is already a newt-based parted frontend (nparted), which will do for dialog mode. The standard parted should suffice for readline mode; I think it should be easy enough to put I tested nparted. Buggy like hell. Gruss/Regards, Eduard. -- www42:~ # mv /mnt/c/windows/win.com /dev/null mv: /dev/null: data refused -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Tue, 2002-07-16 at 21:14, Eduard Bloch wrote: Philip Blundell wrote on Tue Jul 16, 2002 um 09:03:29PM: Ah, I just noticed that there is already a newt-based parted frontend (nparted), which will do for dialog mode. The standard parted should suffice for readline mode; I think it should be easy enough to put I tested nparted. Buggy like hell. There's nothing in the BTS apart from one resolved wishlist item. Wanna file some reports for the bugs you found? p. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 10:14:36PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote: #include hallo.h Philip Blundell wrote on Tue Jul 16, 2002 um 09:03:29PM: Ah, I just noticed that there is already a newt-based parted frontend (nparted), which will do for dialog mode. The standard parted should suffice for readline mode; I think it should be easy enough to put I tested nparted. Buggy like hell. It was when I looked too, but that was some time ago. I started work on something I called cparted a while ago, which was a cfdisk-like front end to parted. It doesn't yet support all the flashy features of parted (partition moving, resizing), but it has the advantage that it is a familiar interface. Current status is that it can handle msdos and gpt table creation, and partition creation and deletion. Tested only on ia64. Not touched it since March, but I can certainly make the code available. Richard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] immo vero scripsit: We can't guarantee anything, but we _will_ have a stable d-i in appropriate time. We _must_ have a stable d-i in time. The alternative is PGI (or both). Not b-f. The reality is: The current alternative is b-f only, and there are a few people working on at least maintaining the code. regards, junichi -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] : Junichi Uekawa http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer GPG Fingerprint : 17D6 120E 4455 1832 9423 7447 3059 BF92 CD37 56F4 Libpkg-guide: http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
* Joey Hess | Tollef Fog Heen wrote: | | Does anybody have a suggestion on how to solve this problem? | | I'd suggest writing the partitioner with some real ui toolkit and making | it feed relevant values back into the debconf database. how would you call the right partitioner based on UI? We'd need to call a different partitioner if we are doing this stuff in some graphical/semi-graphical UI than in a text-only (non-slang/curses). -- Tollef Fog Heen,''`. UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' : `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Mon, 2002-07-15 at 00:58, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: in order to get debian-installer into working shape, it is obvious that the user has some way to partition the hard drive. An auto-partitioner will probably only need debconf as it's UI. However, manual partitioning using debconf will be very painful. Developing a debconf partitioning widget might be a little overkill, so I am not sure how we want to solve this challenge. Does anybody have a suggestion on how to solve this problem? How about writing a handful of frontends for libparted, so that we have one similar in style to each debconf frontend? Do we think that parted will be stable enough to use as the sole partitioning program for a debian-installer based release? p. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
* Philip Blundell | On Mon, 2002-07-15 at 00:58, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: | in order to get debian-installer into working shape, it is obvious | that the user has some way to partition the hard drive. An | auto-partitioner will probably only need debconf as it's UI. However, | manual partitioning using debconf will be very painful. Developing a | debconf partitioning widget might be a little overkill, so I am not | sure how we want to solve this challenge. | | Does anybody have a suggestion on how to solve this problem? (please respect my M-F-T) | How about writing a handful of frontends for libparted, so that we have | one similar in style to each debconf frontend? Do we think that parted | will be stable enough to use as the sole partitioning program for a | debian-installer based release? I've still had parted segfault on me -- a partitioner must absolutely not do that. I am Cc-ing the parted package maintainer so he can voice his opinion. Apart from it segfaulting occasionally and having a semi-horrible API, it should be ok-ish. :) -- Tollef Fog Heen,''`. UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' : `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 09:50:26AM +0100, Philip Blundell wrote: On Mon, 2002-07-15 at 00:58, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: However, manual partitioning using debconf will be very painful. Developing a debconf partitioning widget might be a little overkill, so I am not sure how we want to solve this challenge. Provide some way of dropping to a real program, like cfdisk? (switch the user to vc5, run cfdisk there, once it's quit, flick back to vc1) How about writing a handful of frontends for libparted, so that we have one similar in style to each debconf frontend? That seems like a fair chunk of effort, and relying on libparted being stable and usable (when we've never tried it before), _and_ signficantly enhanced, seems like a good way of adding another long delay before we can get the next release out. Just getting the installer to work on Debian (with the 11 arches we have, and the extra ones waiting in the wings, not to mention the huge range of system capabilities we expect to work with) is a pretty hefty challenge. Do we think that parted will be stable enough to use as the sole partitioning program for a debian-installer based release? I'm expecting some working installation systems (PGI, d-i, whatever) within a couple of months... (i386 only, and other limitations, sure, but working nevertheless) Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/ I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.'' msg20852/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
#include hallo.h Anthony Towns wrote on Mon Jul 15, 2002 um 08:19:39PM: That seems like a fair chunk of effort, and relying on libparted being stable and usable (when we've never tried it before), _and_ signficantly enhanced, seems like a good way of adding another long delay before we can get the next release out. We can stick with boot-floppies for Woody+1 and release Debian-4.0 with DI ;) Just getting the installer to work on Debian (with the 11 arches we have, and the extra ones waiting in the wings, not to mention the huge range of system capabilities we expect to work with) is a pretty hefty challenge. In addition, our disk management frontend should be able to handle LVM and RAID devices, IMHO. And have some auto-setup functions for them. Gruss/Regards, Eduard. -- checking for the validity of the Maxwell laws on this machine... ok checking if e=mc^2... ok checking if we can safely swap on /dev/fd0... yes (Ausgabe von configure bei kvirc 2.0) msg20856/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 03:58:03PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote: We can stick with boot-floppies for Woody+1 and release Debian-4.0 with DI ;) No, no we can't. Cheers, aj (Joke you say? Like in an egg? Funny? Yes, they are runny if you don't boil them.) -- Anthony Towns [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/ I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.'' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 11:10:55AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: * Philip Blundell | On Mon, 2002-07-15 at 00:58, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: | in order to get debian-installer into working shape, it is obvious | that the user has some way to partition the hard drive. An | auto-partitioner will probably only need debconf as it's UI. However, | manual partitioning using debconf will be very painful. Developing a | debconf partitioning widget might be a little overkill, so I am not | sure how we want to solve this challenge. | | Does anybody have a suggestion on how to solve this problem? (please respect my M-F-T) | How about writing a handful of frontends for libparted, so that we have | one similar in style to each debconf frontend? Do we think that parted | will be stable enough to use as the sole partitioning program for a | debian-installer based release? I've still had parted segfault on me -- a partitioner must absolutely not do that. I am Cc-ing the parted package maintainer so he can voice his opinion. I've hardly ever had parted segfault, and the bugs which caused it to do so on one or two occasions have been fixed ... The bigger issue is that parted is very strict about the partition tables it reads, so parted will not work well with inconsistent / dodgy partition tables which may have been caused by other programs. The ability to resize filesystems in the installer would be _very_ cool, however, but there may need to be a fallback method to normal fdisk ... Apart from it segfaulting occasionally and having a semi-horrible API, it should be ok-ish. :) What are your problems with the parted API? I think it's been pretty well designed, myself (well, having worked with it from the library side, anyway) Cheers, Timshel -- Timshel Knoll [EMAIL PROTECTED], Debian email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian GNU/Linux developer: http://people.debian.org/~timshel/ GnuPG public key: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
in order to get debian-installer into working shape, it is obvious that the user has some way to partition the hard drive. An auto-partitioner will probably only need debconf as it's UI. However, manual partitioning using debconf will be very painful. Developing a debconf partitioning widget might be a little overkill, so I am not sure how we want to solve this challenge. Does anybody have a suggestion on how to solve this problem? -- Tollef Fog Heen,''`. UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' : `. `' `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
Tollef Fog Heen wrote: in order to get debian-installer into working shape, it is obvious that the user has some way to partition the hard drive. An auto-partitioner will probably only need debconf as it's UI. However, manual partitioning using debconf will be very painful. Developing a debconf partitioning widget might be a little overkill, so I am not sure how we want to solve this challenge. Does anybody have a suggestion on how to solve this problem? I'd suggest writing the partitioner with some real ui toolkit and making it feed relevant values back into the debconf database. -- see shy jo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [d-i] debconf, partitioning widget?
On Sun, Jul 14, 2002 at 08:03:27PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: Tollef Fog Heen wrote: in order to get debian-installer into working shape, it is obvious that the user has some way to partition the hard drive. An auto-partitioner will probably only need debconf as it's UI. However, manual partitioning using debconf will be very painful. Developing a debconf partitioning widget might be a little overkill, so I am not sure how we want to solve this challenge. Does anybody have a suggestion on how to solve this problem? I'd suggest writing the partitioner with some real ui toolkit and making it feed relevant values back into the debconf database. pgi 0.9.7 has the beginnings of a gui partitioner, but I guess you are looking for text-based solutions here. But it might be very nice to imitate the gui solution with a dialog type interface, that way people stepping 'down' to the text install would at least recognize the layout. -- *--v- Installing Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 v--* | http://www.debian.org/releases/woody/installmanual | | debian-imac (potato): http://debian-imac.sourceforge.net | |Chris Tillman[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | May the Source be with you | ** -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
