Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Fbsd8 fb...@a1poweruser.com wrote: deeptec...@gmail.com wrote: Fbsd8 wrote: 6. At the Complete screen when the reboot option is selected the cd/dvd drive should automatically open so the install media can be removed just like sysinstall does. If disc1.iso or dvd.iso was installed to memstick and used to boot from to install the system, then a message screen should pop out saying the memstick has to be removed now before the reboot starts. Don't let the reboot occur until the memstick is removed. Do NOT alter! More often than not, (1) you keep floppies, optical discs, and memory sticks in your computer without intending to boot from them, and (2) you'll want to use your BIOS's boot-once functionality (press a specific keyboard button to bring up the media choser menu for that boot; otherwise boot from the hard drives) whenever you do want to boot from floppies, optical discs, or memory sticks. You have missed the subject completely of what #6 is addressing. This has nothing to do with telling the pc hardware which media to boot from at power up time like you suggest in your post. This has to do with the logic of the new bsdinstall process and the differences between bsdinstall and sysinstall in the way the install media is removed from the pc before it reboots as part of the normal install process. I did not suggest anything related to hardware settings. FreeBSD can't and shouldn't manipulate settings of a proprietary BIOS. In fact, proper BIOSes have the option to allow changes to settings only via the hardware-based BIOS menu (ie., to block the OS from changing BIOS settings). Instead, I stated the reason why - unmounting and ejecting the disc, or - unmounting the memory stick and waiting for it to be removed will be a nuisance for the majority of the users, and a convenience for only the minority. As others (Chris Rees, Miroslav Lachman) have said, a simple reminder is sufficient. BTW, let's assume that the user uses WRONG(TM) boot settings in the BIOS, and therefore does want to remove a disc or memory stick at the end of the installation process. What is the manual removability of discs and memory sticks at the end of the installation process? Because - I can't eject discs (via the drive's eject button) while they are mounted, - recently, there were some FreeBSD instability issues when unplugging mounted memory sticks. So it seems that bsdinstall should first unmount the installation media. On the other hand, unacknowledged unmounting is still not desired, because theoretically the user might want to do something via the auxiliary console, for which the installation media is required. To cover the above points, I propose the following dialog: (1) the body text of Installation has finished. You may now reboot the machine. You also have the option to unmount/eject the installation media before rebooting. Removal of the media may be required to avoid starting the installer again on the next boot., (2) a button labeled unmount/eject installation media, (3) a button labeled reboot, which should be the default selection. Chosing the unmount/eject installation media button will unmount the media, and eject it if it's a disc, and the following dialog will be shown: (1) the body text of Please remove the installation media. Press any key to reboot. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On 23/09/2011 04:49, Matthew D. Fuller wrote: On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 08:26:47AM + I heard the voice of Thomas Mueller, and lo! it spake thus: I don't think there is any particular advantage in aligning GPT partitions on 1 MB boundaries. No, but it's bg, and rund! (http://dilbert.com/fast/1994-03-24/) ... and both Windows and Linux do it that way so to avoid any possible future problems, we should too. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Sunday, September 25, 2011 4:16:51 am Thomas Mueller wrote: Other issue is the 64 KB boot partition, which does not boot for me. There ought to be an option, or is there already, to omit the boot partition. Sysinstall had such an option, to not install the boot loader, since user could already have another boot manager such as LILO or grub (legacy or grub2). Does the 64 KB boot partition have to be the first partition on the disk in order to be functional? One might want to use a different boot loader, such as grub2, and what about the EFI system partition that is very different from a 64 KB FreeBSD boot partition? The GPT boot-from-BIOS mode requires the 64 KB boot partition. At some point when we have an EFI loader we will not need a boot partition for GPT, though instead you will need a larger EFI partition. -- John Baldwin ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
More concerns and questions onthe new bsdinstall: There is no upgrade function. How will a user be able to upgrade to BETA3 (or RC1?) without wiping out BETA2 installation? For instance, user might have built many software applications from ports and not want to rebuild everything. Other issue is the 64 KB boot partition, which does not boot for me. There ought to be an option, or is there already, to omit the boot partition. Sysinstall had such an option, to not install the boot loader, since user could already have another boot manager such as LILO or grub (legacy or grub2). Does the 64 KB boot partition have to be the first partition on the disk in order to be functional? One might want to use a different boot loader, such as grub2, and what about the EFI system partition that is very different from a 64 KB FreeBSD boot partition? Tom ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
More concerns and questions onthe new bsdinstall: There is no upgrade function. How will a user be able to upgrade to BETA3 (or RC1?) without wiping out BETA2 installation? For instance, user might have built many software applications from ports and not want to rebuild everything. I have the same doubt/question. If I update the system via the ports, do I have BETA3/RC1? or do I have to run # freebsd-update to get the current release? Also, like is suggested, if I update by any means, I will probably have to delete reinstall everything in the ports. Is there a way not to do this? Regards, Antonio ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
deeptec...@gmail.com wrote: Fbsd8 wrote: 6. At the Complete screen when the reboot option is selected the cd/dvd drive should automatically open so the install media can be removed just like sysinstall does. If disc1.iso or dvd.iso was installed to memstick and used to boot from to install the system, then a message screen should pop out saying the memstick has to be removed now before the reboot starts. Don't let the reboot occur until the memstick is removed. Do NOT alter! More often than not, (1) you keep floppies, optical discs, and memory sticks in your computer without intending to boot from them, and (2) you'll want to use your BIOS's boot-once functionality (press a specific keyboard button to bring up the media choser menu for that boot; otherwise boot from the hard drives) whenever you do want to boot from floppies, optical discs, or memory sticks. You have missed the subject completely of what #6 is addressing. This has nothing to do with telling the pc hardware which media to boot from at power up time like you suggest in your post. This has to do with the logic of the new bsdinstall process and the differences between bsdinstall and sysinstall in the way the install media is removed from the pc before it reboots as part of the normal install process. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On 25 September 2011 14:01, Fbsd8 fb...@a1poweruser.com wrote: deeptec...@gmail.com wrote: Fbsd8 wrote: 6. At the Complete screen when the reboot option is selected the cd/dvd drive should automatically open so the install media can be removed just like sysinstall does. If disc1.iso or dvd.iso was installed to memstick and used to boot from to install the system, then a message screen should pop out saying the memstick has to be removed now before the reboot starts. Don't let the reboot occur until the memstick is removed. Do NOT alter! More often than not, (1) you keep floppies, optical discs, and memory sticks in your computer without intending to boot from them, and (2) you'll want to use your BIOS's boot-once functionality (press a specific keyboard button to bring up the media choser menu for that boot; otherwise boot from the hard drives) whenever you do want to boot from floppies, optical discs, or memory sticks. You have missed the subject completely of what #6 is addressing. This has nothing to do with telling the pc hardware which media to boot from at power up time like you suggest in your post. This has to do with the logic of the new bsdinstall process and the differences between bsdinstall and sysinstall in the way the install media is removed from the pc before it reboots as part of the normal install process. Surely a reminder rather than an obstinate refusal to continue is appropriate? Example: Please remove your install media so that it is not loaded on reboot, and press any key to continue Chris ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 07:30:49 -0500 Antonio Olivares olivares14...@gmail.com wrote: More concerns and questions onthe new bsdinstall: There is no upgrade function. How will a user be able to upgrade to BETA3 (or RC1?) without wiping out BETA2 installation? For instance, user might have built many software applications from ports and not want to rebuild everything. I have the same doubt/question. If I update the system via the ports, do I have BETA3/RC1? or do I have to run # freebsd-update to get the current release? Also, like is suggested, if I update by any means, I will probably have to delete reinstall everything in the ports. Is there a way not to do this? I run HEAD (what's now becoming 9.0) all the time and only very rarely do I have to update ports because I updated world and kernel. I've been doing this for many, many years. Generally, only ports which are intimately tied to kernel sources, like virtualbox or the nividia-driver, are affected. One way to run BETA3 would be to grab the stable sources using csup and just compile and install the new world and kernel. If your goal is to test the installation process then this would not be the way to go. -- Gary Jennejohn ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011, Antonio Olivares wrote: More concerns and questions onthe new bsdinstall: There is no upgrade function. How will a user be able to upgrade to BETA3 (or RC1?) without wiping out BETA2 installation? For instance, user might have built many software applications from ports and not want to rebuild everything. I have the same doubt/question. If I update the system via the ports, do I have BETA3/RC1? or do I have to run # freebsd-update to get the current release? The operating system is separate from ports. Source upgrades or freebsd-update are used to upgrade FreeBSD, while portsnap and portmaster/portupgrade are used to update ports. Also, like is suggested, if I update by any means, I will probably have to delete reinstall everything in the ports. Is there a way not to do this? Ports built for 9.x normally do not need to be rebuilt to continue to run on 9.x+1. The ABI is stable (unchanging).___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com wrote: On Sun, 25 Sep 2011, Antonio Olivares wrote: More concerns and questions onthe new bsdinstall: There is no upgrade function. How will a user be able to upgrade to BETA3 (or RC1?) without wiping out BETA2 installation? For instance, user might have built many software applications from ports and not want to rebuild everything. I have the same doubt/question. If I update the system via the ports, do I have BETA3/RC1? or do I have to run # freebsd-update to get the current release? The operating system is separate from ports. Source upgrades or freebsd-update are used to upgrade FreeBSD, while portsnap and portmaster/portupgrade are used to update ports. Also, like is suggested, if I update by any means, I will probably have to delete reinstall everything in the ports. Is there a way not to do this? Ports built for 9.x normally do not need to be rebuilt to continue to run on 9.x+1. The ABI is stable (unchanging). But things can change (and have to me on occasion). If you're absolutely certain that the ABI/KBI isn't changing, then the assumption is true, but there are some times that ABI/KBI can change at a later date if you update from RELEASE to STABLE. HTH, -Garrett ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Gary Jennejohn gljennj...@googlemail.com wrote: On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 07:30:49 -0500 Antonio Olivares olivares14...@gmail.com wrote: More concerns and questions onthe new bsdinstall: There is no upgrade function. How will a user be able to upgrade to BETA3 (or RC1?) without wiping out BETA2 installation? For instance, user might have built many software applications from ports and not want to rebuild everything. I have the same doubt/question. If I update the system via the ports, do I have BETA3/RC1? or do I have to run # freebsd-update to get the current release? Also, like is suggested, if I update by any means, I will probably have to delete reinstall everything in the ports. Is there a way not to do this? I run HEAD (what's now becoming 9.0) all the time and only very rarely do I have to update ports because I updated world and kernel. I've been doing this for many, many years. Generally, only ports which are intimately tied to kernel sources, like virtualbox or the nividia-driver, are affected. The easiest way to handle this is to use add the following lines to your /etc/src.conf to automatically rebuild / reinstall the ports when recompiling the kernel: $ grep -r PORTS_MODULES /etc/src.conf PORTS_MODULES= emulators/virtualbox-ose-kmod x11/nvidia-driver It's an undocumented feature that I'm going to file a PR for so that it added to the documentation. Cheers, -Garrett ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
Chris Rees wrote: On 25 September 2011 14:01, Fbsd8fb...@a1poweruser.com wrote: deeptec...@gmail.com wrote: Fbsd8 wrote: [...] the reboot starts. Don't let the reboot occur until the memstick is removed. Do NOT alter! More often than not, (1) you keep floppies, optical discs, and memory sticks in your computer without intending to boot from them, and (2) you'll want to use your BIOS's boot-once functionality (press a specific keyboard button to bring up the media choser menu for that boot; otherwise boot from the hard drives) whenever you do want to boot from floppies, optical discs, or memory sticks. You have missed the subject completely of what #6 is addressing. This has nothing to do with telling the pc hardware which media to boot from at power up time like you suggest in your post. This has to do with the logic of the new bsdinstall process and the differences between bsdinstall and sysinstall in the way the install media is removed from the pc before it reboots as part of the normal install process. Surely a reminder rather than an obstinate refusal to continue is appropriate? Example: Please remove your install media so that it is not loaded on reboot, and press any key to continue I agree with your suggestion. Reminder is helpful for beginners. But I really hate systems / applications forcing me to do something not necessary. Things like this are operators decision. System should provide choices. There are real situations, where install media cannot be removed (install via remote KVM with real local USB stick) and there is no need to not allow user to reboot from the installer. Miroslav Lachman ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
Fbsd8 wrote: 6. At the Complete screen when the reboot option is selected the cd/dvd drive should automatically open so the install media can be removed just like sysinstall does. If disc1.iso or dvd.iso was installed to memstick and used to boot from to install the system, then a message screen should pop out saying the memstick has to be removed now before the reboot starts. Don't let the reboot occur until the memstick is removed. Do NOT alter! More often than not, (1) you keep floppies, optical discs, and memory sticks in your computer without intending to boot from them, and (2) you'll want to use your BIOS's boot-once functionality (press a specific keyboard button to bring up the media choser menu for that boot; otherwise boot from the hard drives) whenever you do want to boot from floppies, optical discs, or memory sticks. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 08:26:47AM + I heard the voice of Thomas Mueller, and lo! it spake thus: I don't think there is any particular advantage in aligning GPT partitions on 1 MB boundaries. No, but it's bg, and rund! (http://dilbert.com/fast/1994-03-24/) It's a nice round number, and with even the by-modern-standards smallish drives I was using, it rounds to 0 wasted space. So I figured, what does it hurt? My mail was just to say IWBNI the hurt was more Hey, this probably isn't going to work, are you sure? rather than Hahaha, you think you can boot?? Sucker! -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fulle...@over-yonder.net Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
From Matthew D. Fuller fulle...@over-yonder.net: I've been meaning to mention this, but we really should document somewhere that it has a _MAXIMUM_ size. I setup a system a few weeks back with GPT, and figured I'd just make the first 'real' partition start at the 1 meg mark. And make everything before that (1 meg - the however many sectors for the pmbr) the freebsd-boot partition. It worked fine, up 'till the point that I tried to boot, and it completely failed to, complaining that the boot code was too big. I had to track around in pmbr to find . . cmp $0x9000,%ax.. . # Don't load past 0x9, . . jae err_big.. . # 545k should be enough for . . mov %ax,%es.. . # any boot code. :) and redo the partition to 512k (leaving a few hundred k unused before the next partition started) before it would boot. That's a little nerve-wracking to hit on a critical system... I don't think there is any particular advantage in aligning GPT partitions on 1 MB boundaries. Nothing sacred about being an integer power of 2, wouldn't it be sufficient for boot partition size to be divisible by 4096 bytes, when the hard drive sector size is 4096 bytes? Tom ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Wed, 21 Sep 2011, Thomas Mueller wrote: From Matthew D. Fuller fulle...@over-yonder.net: I've been meaning to mention this, but we really should document somewhere that it has a _MAXIMUM_ size. I setup a system a few weeks back with GPT, and figured I'd just make the first 'real' partition start at the 1 meg mark. And make everything before that (1 meg - the however many sectors for the pmbr) the freebsd-boot partition. It worked fine, up 'till the point that I tried to boot, and it completely failed to, complaining that the boot code was too big. I had to track around in pmbr to find . . cmp $0x9000,%ax.. . # Don't load past 0x9, . . jae err_big.. . # 545k should be enough for . . mov %ax,%es.. . # any boot code. :) and redo the partition to 512k (leaving a few hundred k unused before the next partition started) before it would boot. That's a little nerve-wracking to hit on a critical system... I don't think there is any particular advantage in aligning GPT partitions on 1 MB boundaries. Agreed. But Windows 7 also starts the main partition at 1M. Taking that as a standard could provide compatibility with other (admittedly poorly-written) disk partitioning software. And it might not, but if it helps with POLA for people used to using GPT elsewhere, that's not a bad reason either. The bug shown above means the freebsd-boot partition should be limited to 512K at present. Another 512K of space after that doesn't really cost anything. If that extra space is needed later, it can be used without repartitioning. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
Forgot to add this for reference earlier: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd758814%28v=sql.100%29.aspx Valid Starting Partition Offsets has some justification for the 1M offset. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
1MB is a magic number. It works with advanced format disks, traditional disks, some odd SSD and most raid configurations. Lucas Holt On Sep 21, 2011, at 4:26 AM, Thomas Mueller mueller6...@bellsouth.net wrote: From Matthew D. Fuller fulle...@over-yonder.net: I've been meaning to mention this, but we really should document somewhere that it has a _MAXIMUM_ size. I setup a system a few weeks back with GPT, and figured I'd just make the first 'real' partition start at the 1 meg mark. And make everything before that (1 meg - the however many sectors for the pmbr) the freebsd-boot partition. It worked fine, up 'till the point that I tried to boot, and it completely failed to, complaining that the boot code was too big. I had to track around in pmbr to find . . cmp $0x9000,%ax.. . # Don't load past 0x9, . . jae err_big.. . # 545k should be enough for . . mov %ax,%es.. . # any boot code. :) and redo the partition to 512k (leaving a few hundred k unused before the next partition started) before it would boot. That's a little nerve-wracking to hit on a critical system... I don't think there is any particular advantage in aligning GPT partitions on 1 MB boundaries. Nothing sacred about being an integer power of 2, wouldn't it be sufficient for boot partition size to be divisible by 4096 bytes, when the hard drive sector size is 4096 bytes? Tom ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On 2011-Sep-19 13:25:27 +0100, Bruce Cran br...@cran.org.uk wrote: I seem to remember (perhaps incorrectly) there was a discussion about bumping the default to 128 kB or more for the freebsd-boot partition. Will 64 kB be enough for 9.x? At least for x86 architectures, it seems adequate. The GPT loaders are 13K (UFS) and 33K (ZFS). Even if they were combined with no code overlap, that's only 46KB. As for missing functionality, the only things I can think of would be: 1) multiboot support - which is implemented in 512 bytes for MBR so it's difficult to see how it could require more than a few KB. 2) nextboot support for ZFS - writing to ZFS is not feasible in the bootloader so this implies some other alternative. 3) Potentially linked to the above - provision for booting off ZFS clones or snapshots. I'm not sure how much code the latter two features might require. As for size, I'd suggest that if the default freebsd-boot size is going to be changed, it should be adjusted so that the following partition is aligned to a reasonably sized power of 2 - 128KB or 256KB. -- Peter Jeremy pgp41Ak7uOjKP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
Thomas Mueller mueller6727@bellsouth.net There was a typo on my part that I failed to correct, missing at the end of From: Thomas Mueller mueller6...@bellsouth.net Responding to Warren Block wbl...@wonkity.com and others on the boot partition: So the 64 KB boot partition, nonbootable on my computer, is for legacy BIOS and no good on UEFI? But I was able to boot the installation memstick for BETA1 and BETA2. If the 64 KB boot partition is nonfunctional for me, I'd like it to be optional. Or maybe the installation would go through even without the boot partition? I notice there is no /usr/mdec directory in FreeBSD 9.0-to-be as there was in FreeBSD 8.2 and still is in NetBSD. Another question on the same general topic, the new bsdinstaller: Is the home directory supposed to be /home or /usr/home? I wanted /home, but the installer made /home into a symbolic link to /usr/home, I corrected this successfully, but later saw, regarding PC-BSD 9.0-BETA2: (quoting) Auto correct if user tries to use /home to /usr/home (end of quote) I think I did rm /home mv /usr/home / Tom ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 04:23:49PM +1000 I heard the voice of Peter Jeremy, and lo! it spake thus: On 2011-Sep-19 13:25:27 +0100, Bruce Cran br...@cran.org.uk wrote: Will 64 kB be enough for 9.x? At least for x86 architectures, it seems adequate. [...] As for size, I'd suggest that if the default freebsd-boot size is going to be changed, it should be adjusted so that the following partition is aligned to a reasonably sized power of 2 - 128KB or 256KB. I've been meaning to mention this, but we really should document somewhere that it has a _MAXIMUM_ size. I setup a system a few weeks back with GPT, and figured I'd just make the first 'real' partition start at the 1 meg mark. And make everything before that (1 meg - the however many sectors for the pmbr) the freebsd-boot partition. It worked fine, up 'till the point that I tried to boot, and it completely failed to, complaining that the boot code was too big. I had to track around in pmbr to find . . cmp $0x9000,%ax.. . # Don't load past 0x9, . . jae err_big.. . # 545k should be enough for . . mov %ax,%es.. . # any boot code. :) and redo the partition to 512k (leaving a few hundred k unused before the next partition started) before it would boot. That's a little nerve-wracking to hit on a critical system... -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fulle...@over-yonder.net Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
on 18/09/2011 23:18 Kevin Oberman said the following: On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 2:55 AM, Thomas Mueller mueller6727@bellsouth.net wrote: Some more ideas on the new bsdinstaller cross my mind. Since the way the bsdinstaller would make partitions is unpredictable, at least to the uninitiated, and in all likelihood at variance with how much space the user wants to allocate, it might be better to offer a roadmap to help guide the user to allocating space for FreeBSD using gpart or Rod Smith's gdisk. Also, I can't see the function of the 64 KB boot partition with no file system, which does not boot for me, though I can boot the main partition using grub2 from the System Rescue CD (http://sysresccd.org/). The 64KB freebsd-boot partition is to contain the GPT boot code which is used by UEFI BIOS in place of the old MBR used by legacy BIOS. You need to use gpart(8) to write the GPT boot code to that partition, but I don't know if bsdinstall does so. It might just write the PMBR that is used for booting with legacy BIOS. I'll admit that I have not checked. (See the gpart(8) man page for details on writing the pmbr and gptboot.) I assume bsdinstall writes both so that AMD64 machines with EFI and 32-bit systems will both work. This is very different from the old traditional slice/partition system. I don't think that we create a GPT boot partition that is going to be used by UEFI BIOS. We use specific freebsd-boot partition type, which, I am sure, is unknown to BIOSes. So, as you say, we install PMBR, which will be booted by BIOS, and which will then load the main boot code from the boot partition. -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On 09/19/11 02:52, Fbsd8 wrote: Kevin Oberman wrote: On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 2:55 AM, Thomas Mueller mueller6727@bellsouth.net wrote: Some more ideas on the new bsdinstaller cross my mind. Since the way the bsdinstaller would make partitions is unpredictable, at least to the uninitiated, and in all likelihood at variance with how much space the user wants to allocate, it might be better to offer a roadmap to help guide the user to allocating space for FreeBSD using gpart or Rod Smith's gdisk. Also, I can't see the function of the 64 KB boot partition with no file system, which does not boot for me, though I can boot the main partition using grub2 from the System Rescue CD (http://sysresccd.org/). The 64KB freebsd-boot partition is to contain the GPT boot code which is used by UEFI BIOS in place of the old MBR used by legacy BIOS. You need to use gpart(8) to write the GPT boot code to that partition, but I don't know if bsdinstall does so. It might just write the PMBR that is used for booting with legacy BIOS. I'll admit that I have not checked. (See the gpart(8) man page for details on writing the pmbr and gptboot.) I assume bsdinstall writes both so that AMD64 machines with EFI and 32-bit systems will both work. This is very different from the old traditional slice/partition system. The above info is another example of the type of information that should be added to a help option on the dialog screen for the bsdinstall disk configuration function. I also think that the bsdinstaller should offer the user an option to select between using the old MBR configuration used by legacy BIOS that sysinstall uses and the new gpart configuration which bsdinstall offers now. You absolutely can do new MBR installs, as well as new straight bsdlabel installs (dangerously dedicated). You just have to use the partition editor instead of the autopartitioner, and then choose to use the appropriate partition type. -Nathan ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On 18/09/2011 10:55, Thomas Mueller mueller6727@bellsouth.net wrote: Also, I can't see the function of the 64 KB boot partition with no file system, which does not boot for me, though I can boot the main partition using grub2 from the System Rescue CD (http://sysresccd.org/). I seem to remember (perhaps incorrectly) there was a discussion about bumping the default to 128 kB or more for the freebsd-boot partition. Will 64 kB be enough for 9.x? -- Bruce Cran ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
Nathan Whitehorn wrote: On 09/19/11 02:52, Fbsd8 wrote: Kevin Oberman wrote: On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 2:55 AM, Thomas Mueller mueller6727@bellsouth.net wrote: Some more ideas on the new bsdinstaller cross my mind. Since the way the bsdinstaller would make partitions is unpredictable, at least to the uninitiated, and in all likelihood at variance with how much space the user wants to allocate, it might be better to offer a roadmap to help guide the user to allocating space for FreeBSD using gpart or Rod Smith's gdisk. Also, I can't see the function of the 64 KB boot partition with no file system, which does not boot for me, though I can boot the main partition using grub2 from the System Rescue CD (http://sysresccd.org/). The 64KB freebsd-boot partition is to contain the GPT boot code which is used by UEFI BIOS in place of the old MBR used by legacy BIOS. You need to use gpart(8) to write the GPT boot code to that partition, but I don't know if bsdinstall does so. It might just write the PMBR that is used for booting with legacy BIOS. I'll admit that I have not checked. (See the gpart(8) man page for details on writing the pmbr and gptboot.) I assume bsdinstall writes both so that AMD64 machines with EFI and 32-bit systems will both work. This is very different from the old traditional slice/partition system. The above info is another example of the type of information that should be added to a help option on the dialog screen for the bsdinstall disk configuration function. I also think that the bsdinstaller should offer the user an option to select between using the old MBR configuration used by legacy BIOS that sysinstall uses and the new gpart configuration which bsdinstall offers now. You absolutely can do new MBR installs, as well as new straight bsdlabel installs (dangerously dedicated). You just have to use the partition editor instead of the autopartitioner, and then choose to use the appropriate partition type. -Nathan I think you missed the point here. What is being requested is the partitioning dialog from sysinstall to be included in bsdinstall. The bsdinstall partitioning dialog should inform users about the differences between older and newer PCs and offer options to auto-configure the H.D appropriately. Or better yet have bsdinstall check the hardwares bios to determine if the bios are UEFI aware and what methods can be used to partition. The key here is that bsdinstall should provide at least the same level of automation as sysinstall has on this subject. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
Some more ideas on the new bsdinstaller cross my mind. Since the way the bsdinstaller would make partitions is unpredictable, at least to the uninitiated, and in all likelihood at variance with how much space the user wants to allocate, it might be better to offer a roadmap to help guide the user to allocating space for FreeBSD using gpart or Rod Smith's gdisk. Also, I can't see the function of the 64 KB boot partition with no file system, which does not boot for me, though I can boot the main partition using grub2 from the System Rescue CD (http://sysresccd.org/). Another concern is updating to the next beta (BETA3?) without trashing the installed application software (from ports). So far, bsdinstaller hasn't offered any possibility of upgrading an existing installation. I don't think a user wants to rebuild all ports for every new beta or release candidate. Tom ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 4:55 AM, Thomas Mueller mueller6727@bellsouth.net wrote: Some more ideas on the new bsdinstaller cross my mind. Since the way the bsdinstaller would make partitions is unpredictable, at least to the uninitiated, and in all likelihood at variance with how much space the user wants to allocate, it might be better to offer a roadmap to help guide the user to allocating space for FreeBSD using gpart or Rod Smith's gdisk. Also, I can't see the function of the 64 KB boot partition with no file system, which does not boot for me, though I can boot the main partition using grub2 from the System Rescue CD (http://sysresccd.org/). Another concern is updating to the next beta (BETA3?) without trashing the installed application software (from ports). So far, bsdinstaller hasn't offered any possibility of upgrading an existing installation. I don't think a user wants to rebuild all ports for every new beta or release candidate. This also concerns me. I wanted to ask, if one updates 9.0-BETA 2 through ports, if it was the same as a possible BETA-3? and the big question, if updating, does one have to build all the ports? or when one updates BETA-2, do we really have BETA-3 already? What I would question, is that the choices are offered, but one has to use (+) or (-) keys instead of the up arrow/down arrow to select the packages. When I installed it on an amd64 bit machine, I wanted to select src/ and kernel + base, but I did not know how to change, later I found out that + or - keys would change the selections, I pressed enter and then I could not go back to previous screen. With sysinstall I knew how to go back and forth between the screens, but with bsdinstall it is completely revamped. Tom Regards, Antonio ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Sep 18, 2011, at 2:55 AM, Thomas Mueller mueller6727@bellsouth.net wrote: Some more ideas on the new bsdinstaller cross my mind. Since the way the bsdinstaller would make partitions is unpredictable, at least to the uninitiated, and in all likelihood at variance with how much space the user wants to allocate, it might be better to offer a roadmap to help guide the user to allocating space for FreeBSD using gpart or Rod Smith's gdisk. Also, I can't see the function of the 64 KB boot partition with no file system, which does not boot for me, though I can boot the main partition using grub2 from the System Rescue CD (http://sysresccd.org/). Another concern is updating to the next beta (BETA3?) without trashing the installed application software (from ports). So far, bsdinstaller hasn't offered any possibility of upgrading an existing installation. I don't think a user wants to rebuild all ports for every new beta or release candidate. Upgrading installs is nontrivial, depending on the install options. The fact that sysinstall allowed this was a mistake. -Garrett ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Sun, 18 Sep 2011, Thomas Mueller mueller6...@bellsouth.net wrote: Also, I can't see the function of the 64 KB boot partition with no file system, which does not boot for me (Warning: guesswork and supposition ahead. Set your puzzler in low gear for traction.) AFAIK this is space for boot1 and boot2: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/boot-blocks.html It used to be 16K, but newer boot code like gptzfsboot (33K) needs more room. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 2:55 AM, Thomas Mueller mueller6727@bellsouth.net wrote: Some more ideas on the new bsdinstaller cross my mind. Since the way the bsdinstaller would make partitions is unpredictable, at least to the uninitiated, and in all likelihood at variance with how much space the user wants to allocate, it might be better to offer a roadmap to help guide the user to allocating space for FreeBSD using gpart or Rod Smith's gdisk. Also, I can't see the function of the 64 KB boot partition with no file system, which does not boot for me, though I can boot the main partition using grub2 from the System Rescue CD (http://sysresccd.org/). The 64KB freebsd-boot partition is to contain the GPT boot code which is used by UEFI BIOS in place of the old MBR used by legacy BIOS. You need to use gpart(8) to write the GPT boot code to that partition, but I don't know if bsdinstall does so. It might just write the PMBR that is used for booting with legacy BIOS. I'll admit that I have not checked. (See the gpart(8) man page for details on writing the pmbr and gptboot.) I assume bsdinstall writes both so that AMD64 machines with EFI and 32-bit systems will both work. This is very different from the old traditional slice/partition system. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer - Retired E-mail: kob6...@gmail.com ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
Kevin Oberman wrote: On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 2:55 AM, Thomas Mueller mueller6727@bellsouth.net wrote: Some more ideas on the new bsdinstaller cross my mind. Since the way the bsdinstaller would make partitions is unpredictable, at least to the uninitiated, and in all likelihood at variance with how much space the user wants to allocate, it might be better to offer a roadmap to help guide the user to allocating space for FreeBSD using gpart or Rod Smith's gdisk. Also, I can't see the function of the 64 KB boot partition with no file system, which does not boot for me, though I can boot the main partition using grub2 from the System Rescue CD (http://sysresccd.org/). The 64KB freebsd-boot partition is to contain the GPT boot code which is used by UEFI BIOS in place of the old MBR used by legacy BIOS. You need to use gpart(8) to write the GPT boot code to that partition, but I don't know if bsdinstall does so. It might just write the PMBR that is used for booting with legacy BIOS. I'll admit that I have not checked. (See the gpart(8) man page for details on writing the pmbr and gptboot.) I assume bsdinstall writes both so that AMD64 machines with EFI and 32-bit systems will both work. This is very different from the old traditional slice/partition system. The above info is another example of the type of information that should be added to a help option on the dialog screen for the bsdinstall disk configuration function. I also think that the bsdinstaller should offer the user an option to select between using the old MBR configuration used by legacy BIOS that sysinstall uses and the new gpart configuration which bsdinstall offers now. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Fbsd8 fb...@a1poweruser.com wrote: Kevin Oberman wrote: On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 2:55 AM, Thomas Mueller mueller6727@bellsouth.net wrote: Some more ideas on the new bsdinstaller cross my mind. Since the way the bsdinstaller would make partitions is unpredictable, at least to the uninitiated, and in all likelihood at variance with how much space the user wants to allocate, it might be better to offer a roadmap to help guide the user to allocating space for FreeBSD using gpart or Rod Smith's gdisk. Also, I can't see the function of the 64 KB boot partition with no file system, which does not boot for me, though I can boot the main partition using grub2 from the System Rescue CD (http://sysresccd.org/). The 64KB freebsd-boot partition is to contain the GPT boot code which is used by UEFI BIOS in place of the old MBR used by legacy BIOS. You need to use gpart(8) to write the GPT boot code to that partition, but I don't know if bsdinstall does so. It might just write the PMBR that is used for booting with legacy BIOS. I'll admit that I have not checked. (See the gpart(8) man page for details on writing the pmbr and gptboot.) I assume bsdinstall writes both so that AMD64 machines with EFI and 32-bit systems will both work. This is very different from the old traditional slice/partition system. The above info is another example of the type of information that should be added to a help option on the dialog screen for the bsdinstall disk configuration function. I also think that the bsdinstaller should offer the user an option to select between using the old MBR configuration used by legacy BIOS that sysinstall uses and the new gpart configuration which bsdinstall offers now. I can only see two advantages of the old MBR scheme over GPT. 1. Booteasy is not available, so you need to use gpart to designate booting from a different partition 2. Some other OSes don't support it. 32-bit Windows, Solaris, 64-bit Windows on systems lacking EFI While GPT has major advantages over the old MBR system, I think these two justify maintaining the ability to install FreeBSD with MBR. I also should be clear in that sysinstall does work fine on a disk that is already configured with MBR partitioning. I am sure of this because I have done it and had no problems with that part of the install. It's only if you want to partition a new disk with the intent of later installing an OS that does not support GPT. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer - Retired E-mail: kob6...@gmail.com ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
Wiki, gnats, scrap of paper on someones desk, etc? I've put a link to the few existing PRs in GNATS onto the wiki page. mcl ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
Hello, Kevin. You wrote 15 сентября 2011 г., 2:46:21: 7. On the partition editor screen the option finish should be the first in the list (ie; left most side) so if user accepts this config, hitting enter moves to next menu screen instead of having to tab over taking more time and effort. And again: there is no way to change block size/frag size/inode number in GUI. Only SU/SU+J/Version present in Options and here is no way to change options after partition creation (adding to dialog) but BEFORE real FS are created (changes are committed). First, I don't think you get SU+J (soft-updates and full FS journal), which is a bad combination. I think you get SUJ (journal of metadata) which is a very different and is, I believe the preferred default setup. `+' character could be my mistake here. Of course, all of these are issues that exist with the old installer, but I think can be improved with the move to bsdinstall. As far as I remember, old installer (with black-bacgrounded partiiton creation screen) allows to provide additional newfs arguments... But I've used it very long time ago for last time... -- // Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov l...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 03:46:21PM -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote: Second, I frequently want custom newfs options, most notably -b, -f, and -i. There was no way to do this with sysinstall The source appears to disagree with you From usr.sbin/sysinstall/label.c /* If the user wants a special newfs command for this, set it */ static void getNewfsCmd(PartInfo *p) I'm pretty sure I've used that option in multiple releases of FBSD. If that is missing in the new installer then that is something that needs fixed. Gary ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 5:12 AM, Gary Palmer gpal...@freebsd.org wrote: On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 03:46:21PM -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote: Second, I frequently want custom newfs options, most notably -b, -f, and -i. There was no way to do this with sysinstall The source appears to disagree with you From usr.sbin/sysinstall/label.c /* If the user wants a special newfs command for this, set it */ static void getNewfsCmd(PartInfo *p) I'm pretty sure I've used that option in multiple releases of FBSD. If that is missing in the new installer then that is something that needs fixed. I stand corrected and am baffled by how I missed it. I still want to see the arguments that are to be passed to newfs before I pull the trigger. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer - Retired E-mail: kob6...@gmail.com ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Kevin Oberman kob6...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 5:12 AM, Gary Palmer gpal...@freebsd.org wrote: On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 03:46:21PM -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote: Second, I frequently want custom newfs options, most notably -b, -f, and -i. There was no way to do this with sysinstall The source appears to disagree with you From usr.sbin/sysinstall/label.c /* If the user wants a special newfs command for this, set it */ static void getNewfsCmd(PartInfo *p) I'm pretty sure I've used that option in multiple releases of FBSD. If that is missing in the new installer then that is something that needs fixed. I stand corrected and am baffled by how I missed it. I still want to see the arguments that are to be passed to newfs before I pull the trigger. That functionality doesn't exist today, unless you want to drop into the shell and set everything up manually.. -Garrett ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 11:02:33AM -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote: On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Kevin Oberman kob6...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 5:12 AM, Gary Palmer gpal...@freebsd.org wrote: On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 03:46:21PM -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote: Second, I frequently want custom newfs options, most notably -b, -f, and -i. There was no way to do this with sysinstall The source appears to disagree with you From usr.sbin/sysinstall/label.c /* If the user wants a special newfs command for this, set it */ static void getNewfsCmd(PartInfo *p) I'm pretty sure I've used that option in multiple releases of FBSD. If that is missing in the new installer then that is something that needs fixed. I stand corrected and am baffled by how I missed it. I still want to see the arguments that are to be passed to newfs before I pull the trigger. That functionality doesn't exist today, unless you want to drop into the shell and set everything up manually.. Is there a way of tracking suggested improvements to the new installer other than the mailing list archives? Gary ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Sep 15, 2011, at 11:55 AM, Gary Palmer wrote: Is there a way of tracking suggested improvements to the new installer http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/usr.sbin/bsdinstall/ ? It's a little more annoying viewing changes in the ViewVC interface. There's also svn log though if you have a source tree with svn checked out.. Thanks! -Garrett ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 11:58:55AM -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote: On Sep 15, 2011, at 11:55 AM, Gary Palmer wrote: Is there a way of tracking suggested improvements to the new installer http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/usr.sbin/bsdinstall/ ? It's a little more annoying viewing changes in the ViewVC interface. There's also svn log though if you have a source tree with svn checked out.. Apologies if you misunderstood my query. There has been a lot of discussion lately about bsdinstall, both bugs (or what people consider bugs) and suggestions for improvements. Bugs should obviously go in gnats (Discussions about whether gnats should be replaced can happen behind the pink bikeshed). How about improvement suggestions? Are they tracked anywhere? Wiki, gnats, scrap of paper on someones desk, etc? Even if they are ultimately not considered for inclusion into the new installer, there needs to be a way of tracking all the feedback. Thanks, Gary ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Gary Palmer gpal...@freebsd.org wrote: On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 11:58:55AM -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote: On Sep 15, 2011, at 11:55 AM, Gary Palmer wrote: Is there a way of tracking suggested improvements to the new installer http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/usr.sbin/bsdinstall/ ? It's a little more annoying viewing changes in the ViewVC interface. There's also svn log though if you have a source tree with svn checked out.. Apologies if you misunderstood my query. There has been a lot of discussion lately about bsdinstall, both bugs (or what people consider bugs) and suggestions for improvements. Bugs should obviously go in gnats (Discussions about whether gnats should be replaced can happen behind the pink bikeshed). How about improvement suggestions? Are they tracked anywhere? Wiki, gnats, scrap of paper on someones desk, etc? Even if they are ultimately not considered for inclusion into the new installer, there needs to be a way of tracking all the feedback. Seems like this is the best spot: http://wiki.freebsd.org/BSDInstall -Garrett ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
On 9/12/2011 9:57 AM, Fbsd8 wrote: Here are some problems that I fell need to be addressed in the 9.0 bsdinstaller. 7. On the partition editor screen the option finish should be the first in the list (ie; left most side) so if user accepts this config, hitting enter moves to next menu screen instead of having to tab over taking more time and effort. I noticed as well, there is no way to turn off SoftUpdates with Journaling. e.g. despite unselecting that option, I ended up with a file system below. # mount /dev/ada0p3 on / (ufs, local, journaled soft-updates) devfs on /dev (devfs, local, multilabel) /dev/ada0p4 on /usr (ufs, local, journaled soft-updates) /dev/ada0p5 on /var (ufs, local, journaled soft-updates) In the partition editor, OK and Options both have the same hotkeys (O). Also if you change from the suggested partition default, it always wants to add a boot partition even if there is one already there. e.g. go to guided, delete / and the swap and add some partitions. When you create a new / it will say it needs a boot partition, but that already exists and now there will be two. ---Mike -- --- Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400 Sentex Communications, m...@sentex.net Providing Internet services since 1994 www.sentex.net Cambridge, Ontario Canada http://www.tancsa.com/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
Hello, Fbsd8. You wrote 12 сентября 2011 г., 17:57:41: 7. On the partition editor screen the option finish should be the first in the list (ie; left most side) so if user accepts this config, hitting enter moves to next menu screen instead of having to tab over taking more time and effort. And again: there is no way to change block size/frag size/inode number in GUI. Only SU/SU+J/Version present in Options and here is no way to change options after partition creation (adding to dialog) but BEFORE real FS are created (changes are committed). -- // Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov l...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
2011/9/14 Lev Serebryakov l...@freebsd.org: Hello, Fbsd8. You wrote 12 сентября 2011 г., 17:57:41: 7. On the partition editor screen the option finish should be the first in the list (ie; left most side) so if user accepts this config, hitting enter moves to next menu screen instead of having to tab over taking more time and effort. And again: there is no way to change block size/frag size/inode number in GUI. Only SU/SU+J/Version present in Options and here is no way to change options after partition creation (adding to dialog) but BEFORE real FS are created (changes are committed). First, I don't think you get SU+J (soft-updates and full FS journal), which is a bad combination. I think you get SUJ (journal of metadata) which is a very different and is, I believe the preferred default setup. Second, I frequently want custom newfs options, most notably -b, -f, and -i. There was no way to do this with sysinstall and is still no way to do this with bsdinstall. I suggest an option to specify additional newfs options. The test should note that this is for knowledgeable users and that defaults should be used if you don't understand the significance of any options. It should also provide the options that will be passed to newfs if nothing is done. (I'd like to see this in any case, just to avoid confusion on SU+J vs. SUJ.) Of course, all of these are issues that exist with the old installer, but I think can be improved with the move to bsdinstall. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer - Retired E-mail: kob6...@gmail.com ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
Here are some problems that I fell need to be addressed in the 9.0 bsdinstaller. 1. During the transitional phase to using the new installer, the bsdinstaller welcome screen should have option to select to use the old sysinstall instead of continuing with the new bsdinstaller. Selecting the shell option and entering sysinstall on the command line does launch the previous installer but it does not really work. 2. On the select a keyboard language menu screen, there are 9 options for USA and none of them identify the standard 101 keyboard layout. I've been installing FBSD since release 4.0 and have never changed the keyboard from what ever the default was. This keyboard menu should list the first entry in the list as (default and use the keyboard language as used in all previous releases 'us.iso.acc.kbd'. Also the keymap= statement that is placed in /etc/rc.conf should have a default setting in /etc/defaults/rc.conf. The system hangs if the keymap= statement is missing from /etc/rc.conf on boot. 3.Following the keyboard language menu screen is the set host name screen. It seems that the keyboard language selected in the previous menu is now in effect and if the keys layout does not line up with the keyboard you have, then what ever you enter for the host name is scrambled, (IE. type in home and dwkc is what shows on the screen). There is no option to return to previous keyboard language menu screen to select different keyboard language. Only option is to reboot and start all over again from the beginning of the new bsdinstaller. 4. Distribution selection menu screen. The games ports options are checked with an asterisk meaning these are the defaults. All the options on this menu should be blank so user has to make selection. Default should be no selections. 5. Final configuration screen has the first line add user option and the OK button highlighted. Hitting keyboard enter key takes you into add user function as the default. The exit option should be first in the list so its highlighted and hitting enter on your keyboard moves you to next menu screen just like all the other bsdinataller screens do. 6. At the Complete screen when the reboot option is selected the cd/dvd drive should automatically open so the install media can be removed just like sysinstall does. If disc1.iso or dvd.iso was installed to memstick and used to boot from to install the system, then a message screen should pop out saying the memstick has to be removed now before the reboot starts. Don't let the reboot occur until the memstick is removed. 7. On the partition editor screen the option finish should be the first in the list (ie; left most side) so if user accepts this config, hitting enter moves to next menu screen instead of having to tab over taking more time and effort. 8. No where in the bsdinstaller is any help available. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
Hello, Fbsd8. You wrote 12 сентября 2011 г., 17:57:41: 3.Following the keyboard language menu screen is the set host name screen. It seems that the keyboard language selected in the previous menu is now in effect and if the keys layout does not line up with the keyboard you have, then what ever you enter for the host name is scrambled, (IE. type in home and dwkc is what shows on the screen). There is no option to return to previous keyboard language menu screen to select different keyboard language. Only option is to reboot and start all over again from the beginning of the new bsdinstaller. Oh, yes. Select Russian (KOI-8R) and you cannot enter hostname or filename system or any other line in English (I've tried almost all special keys combinations to find language switch, but with no luck). -- // Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov l...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: 9.0 beta2 the new bsdinstaller
Actually, I think this kind of question is for the freebsd-current list, so I respond on that list. Problem with the old sysinstall is that sysinstall expects installation sets to be broken into 1392 KB chunks as opposed to a full .tgz, .tbz or .txz, or so I believe: I could be wrong. I thought NetBSD had a much better installer (sysinst) compared to FreeBSD sysinstall, but the new installer may reverse that. New installer still leaves me confused at times. I downloaded BETA2 amd64 memstick file and dd'ed it to a USB stick but haven't booted it yet. Base installation ought to be preselected because it is necessary for installed system to be functional, but others might be optional. For ports, I prefer to use portsnap. I intend to keep ports tree from BETA1 and use 'portsnap fetch update' but will have to note in /etc/make.conf that the ports tree is on a different partition, like maybe PORTSDIR=/BETA1/usr/ports Keyboard selection with regard to language in BETA1 was confusing. It is not always necessary to remove the CD, DVD or memstick after installation. One might go into the BIOS or UEFI and change the boot priority, or on my MSI motherboard, I can get a boot menu by hitting F11 when the MSI motherboard splash screen appears. In my case, I intend to delete my nonfunctional NetBSD partitions and make FreeBSD partition in that space; not sure if I need a special boot partition. 64K boot partition for BETA1 played no role, since I started BETA1 from the System Rescue CD (http://sysresccd.org/), selecting Super Grub Disk, then hitting c for command prompt, and set root=(hd0,9) kfreebsd /boot/loader boot I had a problem with the memstick running out of inodes, since the partition on the USB stick had no extra space even though there was plenty of extra space on the USB stick. Tom ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
