Re: Switching to graphical installer by default?
Hi folks, Cyril Brulebois (02/01/2013): > Also, is there anyone aware of any reasons against switching to > graphical installer by default? it's been a while (and I'm quite unhappy to have been kept busy on other things), but I think I might consider this change for a possible rc2. There will be a few grub-installer things to iron out before a final release, so a second release candidate is likely. Now back to getting rc1 finally out. Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Switching to graphical installer by default?
Em 03-01-2013 01:27, Steve McIntyre escreveu: [...] None here, we could/should have done it a while back IMO. +1 -- Melhores cumprimentos/Best regards, Miguel Figueiredo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50e5f240.5090...@debianpt.org
Re: Switching to graphical installer by default?
Bob Proulx, le Wed 02 Jan 2013 22:51:56 -0700, a écrit : > Cyril Brulebois wrote: > > Also, is there anyone aware of any reasons against switching to > > graphical installer by default? > > Can I at least say that I don't like the mouse installer and much > prefer the standard keyboard one? ? I never use the mouse in the graphical installer, it can entirely be used with the keyboard. Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130103110928.gg8...@type.youpi.perso.aquilenet.fr
Re: Switching to graphical installer by default?
Quoting Bob Proulx (b...@proulx.com): > Cyril Brulebois wrote: > > Also, is there anyone aware of any reasons against switching to > > graphical installer by default? > > Can I at least say that I don't like the mouse installer and much > prefer the standard keyboard one? > > I don't have any issues with it. I just don't like it. We expect many people to feel the same, indeed. However, we have one big argument to make graphical installer the default : wider localization as this is the one that supports more languages. As of now, users of these languages had to figure out that they need to choose "Graphical install" from an English-speaking menu to get their language supported. On the other hand, we actually expect those people who prefer the text-based installer to easily find that the only action they have to do is hitting the "down" key, then "Enter" when the installer boot menu shows up. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Switching to graphical installer by default?
Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Also, is there anyone aware of any reasons against switching to > graphical installer by default? Can I at least say that I don't like the mouse installer and much prefer the standard keyboard one? I don't have any issues with it. I just don't like it. Bob signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Switching to graphical installer by default?
Quoting Steve McIntyre (st...@einval.com): > >Also, is there anyone aware of any reasons against switching to > >graphical installer by default? > > None here, we could/should have done it a while back IMO. The only reason I know is that D-I development was really hosed until you took the release management over, Cyril..:-) So, +1 from me. We indeed discussed that at DC12 when Joey, Steve and I had our attention focused on D-Ibut the problems related to space on CDs took precedence... signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Switching to graphical installer by default?
KiBi wrote: >Samuel Thibault (31/12/2012): >> Thanks for the summary. I'll add one: brltty: >> >> - Kill Xorg instead of debconf to switch back installer from g-i to >> textmode. Also, sleep instead of busy-waiting for Xorg. Closes: >> #696972. >> >> This is not needed for RC1, unless we make the graphical installer the >> default. > >I'm planning to merge that one for rc1. > >Also, is there anyone aware of any reasons against switching to >graphical installer by default? None here, we could/should have done it a while back IMO. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com "We're the technical experts. We were hired so that management could ignore our recommendations and tell us how to do our jobs." -- Mike Andrews -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1tqzak-gu...@mail.einval.com
Switching to graphical installer by default?
Samuel Thibault (31/12/2012): > Thanks for the summary. I'll add one: brltty: > > - Kill Xorg instead of debconf to switch back installer from g-i to > textmode. Also, sleep instead of busy-waiting for Xorg. Closes: #696972. > > This is not needed for RC1, unless we make the graphical installer the > default. I'm planning to merge that one for rc1. Also, is there anyone aware of any reasons against switching to graphical installer by default? Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
