Re: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-03-07 Thread Gerrit Kühn
On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 12:24:20 -0800 Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com wrote
about Re: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer:

FC Or, does anyone have instructions on how to convert the ISO images
FC into memstick images?  Preferably using a Linux station, not a FreeBSD
FC station.

I use unetbootin (http://unetbootin.sourceforge.net/) to create usb
install media from iso images. Works for me.


cu
  Gerrit
___
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: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-03-07 Thread Freddie Cash
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Nathan Whitehorn
nwhiteh...@freebsd.org wrote:
 BSDinstall has acquired at this point its final form (prior to a future
 merge with pc-sysinstall), and I believe is ready to replace sysinstall on
 the 9.0 snapshot ISOs. Barring any objections, I would like to pull this
 switch 2 weeks from today, on the 14th of March.
snip
 Bug reports would be very appreciated at this time. There are three known
 bugs currently, which will be fixed soon, so please don't report these:
 error reporting is not graceful if there are no writable disks in the
 system, you must select at least one optional component, and the doc build
 is not currently connected to the releases.
snip

After much finnaggling and gnashing of teeth around hardware (not
related to installer), I have managed to get a bootable 9-CURRENT
image with BSDInstall, and used it to get a bootable install of
FreeBSD 9-CURRENT.  :)

Here are my thought and experiences using the new installer.

Things I really like:
  - that the install CD is a LiveCD with a fully functional system;
while it won't replace a Frenzy CD, it's very close
  - very streamlined install without a lot of extra fluff that just
gets skipped anyway (like everything underneath Standard in the first
sysinstall screen)
  - the ability to use features like GPT, gmirror, zfs right from the get-go
  - the ability to drop to a fully functional shell at various stages
of the install, with access to proper man pages

Things that irritated me:
  - when you drop to a shell from the disk editor screen, it lists the
instructions at the top, but then never repeats them ever again
  - if you get lost in the disk editor shell and type exit to get
back to the disk editor ... it thinks you are finished partitioning
and carries on with the install, which then errors out due to no
writable filesystems, requiring you to restart the entire process
  - the disk editor is very limited, especially in its error handling;
I found myself stuck in a loop trying to exit the screen without a /
filesystem listed, but I was doing everything from the shell
  - screen flips between a nice blue background (the curses
interface?) and a black background (running shell commands?) which is
quite jarring and slightly confusing;
  - screen elements go from nicely centred (curses interface?) and
then jump to the top-left corner of the screen (shell commands?) which
is also quite jarring and slightly confusing

The last two may be limitations in the curses setup?  But it would be
nice if shell command I/O could be centred like the rest, and if the
background could remain a single colour.  Not huge issues, just things
that irritated me.  :)

Overall, I am quite impressed with the new installer, as it is *just*
an installer and not a system configuration creator (or breaker) like
sysinstall.

Now that I understand the new world order of GPT-based partitioning
and booting, I think I'm going to like FreeBSD 9.0 a heck of a lot.

... off to play with dedupe and other ZFSv28 goodies ...

-- 
Freddie Cash
fjwc...@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: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-03-07 Thread Nathan Whitehorn

On 03/07/11 14:14, Freddie Cash wrote:

On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Nathan Whitehorn
nwhiteh...@freebsd.org  wrote:

BSDinstall has acquired at this point its final form (prior to a future
merge with pc-sysinstall), and I believe is ready to replace sysinstall on
the 9.0 snapshot ISOs. Barring any objections, I would like to pull this
switch 2 weeks from today, on the 14th of March.

snip

Bug reports would be very appreciated at this time. There are three known
bugs currently, which will be fixed soon, so please don't report these:
error reporting is not graceful if there are no writable disks in the
system, you must select at least one optional component, and the doc build
is not currently connected to the releases.

snip

After much finnaggling and gnashing of teeth around hardware (not
related to installer), I have managed to get a bootable 9-CURRENT
image with BSDInstall, and used it to get a bootable install of
FreeBSD 9-CURRENT.  :)


Thanks for testing, and sympathies for the hardware trouble!

Here are my thought and experiences using the new installer.

Things I really like:
   - that the install CD is a LiveCD with a fully functional system;
while it won't replace a Frenzy CD, it's very close
   - very streamlined install without a lot of extra fluff that just
gets skipped anyway (like everything underneath Standard in the first
sysinstall screen)
   - the ability to use features like GPT, gmirror, zfs right from the get-go
   - the ability to drop to a fully functional shell at various stages
of the install, with access to proper man pages

Things that irritated me:
   - when you drop to a shell from the disk editor screen, it lists the
instructions at the top, but then never repeats them ever again


Can you suggest a better way to do this? In other words, when and in 
what circumstances would you want to see them again?



   - if you get lost in the disk editor shell and type exit to get
back to the disk editor ... it thinks you are finished partitioning
and carries on with the install, which then errors out due to no
writable filesystems, requiring you to restart the entire process


This is bad. I can modify it to check if a filesystem has been mounted 
at /mnt, and maybe if the fstab file exists and restart the disk editor 
menu if they have not.



   - the disk editor is very limited, especially in its error handling;
I found myself stuck in a loop trying to exit the screen without a /
filesystem listed, but I was doing everything from the shell


That's a clear bug. It should probably only validate the setup if 'Save' 
is selected. The issue of whether it should allow you to save without 
defining a / partition when invoked from a shell is a more complicated 
one, and one I'll have to think about (suggestions welcome).



   - screen flips between a nice blue background (the curses
interface?) and a black background (running shell commands?) which is
quite jarring and slightly confusing;
   - screen elements go from nicely centred (curses interface?) and
then jump to the top-left corner of the screen (shell commands?) which
is also quite jarring and slightly confusing


Yes, this should be prettified. It's running a few things (passwd, 
adduser) in a chroot, and I figured getting things working there was 
more important than making them pretty for now.



The last two may be limitations in the curses setup?  But it would be
nice if shell command I/O could be centred like the rest, and if the
background could remain a single colour.  Not huge issues, just things
that irritated me.  :)

Overall, I am quite impressed with the new installer, as it is *just*
an installer and not a system configuration creator (or breaker) like
sysinstall.

Now that I understand the new world order of GPT-based partitioning
and booting, I think I'm going to like FreeBSD 9.0 a heck of a lot.

... off to play with dedupe and other ZFSv28 goodies ...


Thanks!
-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: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-03-07 Thread Freddie Cash
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Nathan Whitehorn nwhiteh...@freebsd.org wrote:
 On 03/07/11 14:14, Freddie Cash wrote:
 Things that irritated me:
   - when you drop to a shell from the disk editor screen, it lists the
 instructions at the top, but then never repeats them ever again

 Can you suggest a better way to do this? In other words, when and in what
 circumstances would you want to see them again?

It follows along with the next item, so I'll address them both below.

   - if you get lost in the disk editor shell and type exit to get
 back to the disk editor ... it thinks you are finished partitioning
 and carries on with the install, which then errors out due to no
 writable filesystems, requiring you to restart the entire process

 This is bad. I can modify it to check if a filesystem has been mounted at
 /mnt, and maybe if the fstab file exists and restart the disk editor menu if
 they have not.

If something like the above is done, then the first item above is also
handled.  :)

As in, if you forget the instructions, just exit the shell to go back
to the disk editor, which then complains you don't have a mounted
filesystem to install to, and then you can drop back to the shell.

Maybe loop back to the beginning of the disk editor, where it asks you
if you want to do it Guided, Manual, or Shell?  Or something like
that.

Something needs to go here to check for a mounted, writable
filesystem to install to.  :)

On the flip side, the entire install process is short enough that it's
not too onerous to restart it.

   - the disk editor is very limited, especially in its error handling;
 I found myself stuck in a loop trying to exit the screen without a /
 filesystem listed, but I was doing everything from the shell

 That's a clear bug. It should probably only validate the setup if 'Save' is
 selected. The issue of whether it should allow you to save without defining
 a / partition when invoked from a shell is a more complicated one, and one
 I'll have to think about (suggestions welcome).

I don't recall there being a Save option, but maybe I skipped over it
and just went to Exit.  I'll have to look at this screen again.  Using
Save probably would have helpded.  :)

   - screen flips between a nice blue background (the curses
 interface?) and a black background (running shell commands?) which is
 quite jarring and slightly confusing;
   - screen elements go from nicely centred (curses interface?) and
 then jump to the top-left corner of the screen (shell commands?) which
 is also quite jarring and slightly confusing

 Yes, this should be prettified. It's running a few things (passwd, adduser)
 in a chroot, and I figured getting things working there was more important
 than making them pretty for now.

It's a minor nit, as sysinstall does the same.  Maybe there's a way to
use text input fields (like the DHCP screens, and adduser screens from
sysinstall), then run the commands in the background, and just show
error/success messages?  [shrug] I know nothing about curses
programming.  :)

-- 
Freddie Cash
fjwc...@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: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-03-07 Thread Nathan Whitehorn

On 03/07/11 19:27, Freddie Cash wrote:

On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Nathan Whitehornnwhiteh...@freebsd.org  wrote:

On 03/07/11 14:14, Freddie Cash wrote:

Things that irritated me:
   - when you drop to a shell from the disk editor screen, it lists the
instructions at the top, but then never repeats them ever again

Can you suggest a better way to do this? In other words, when and in what
circumstances would you want to see them again?

It follows along with the next item, so I'll address them both below.


   - if you get lost in the disk editor shell and type exit to get
back to the disk editor ... it thinks you are finished partitioning
and carries on with the install, which then errors out due to no
writable filesystems, requiring you to restart the entire process

This is bad. I can modify it to check if a filesystem has been mounted at
/mnt, and maybe if the fstab file exists and restart the disk editor menu if
they have not.

If something like the above is done, then the first item above is also
handled.  :)

As in, if you forget the instructions, just exit the shell to go back
to the disk editor, which then complains you don't have a mounted
filesystem to install to, and then you can drop back to the shell.

Maybe loop back to the beginning of the disk editor, where it asks you
if you want to do it Guided, Manual, or Shell?  Or something like
that.


The Guided, Manual, Shell is what I meant by disk editor menu, so I 
agree with you entirely :)



Something needs to go here to check for a mounted, writable
filesystem to install to.  :)

On the flip side, the entire install process is short enough that it's
not too onerous to restart it.


   - the disk editor is very limited, especially in its error handling;
I found myself stuck in a loop trying to exit the screen without a /
filesystem listed, but I was doing everything from the shell

That's a clear bug. It should probably only validate the setup if 'Save' is
selected. The issue of whether it should allow you to save without defining
a / partition when invoked from a shell is a more complicated one, and one
I'll have to think about (suggestions welcome).

I don't recall there being a Save option, but maybe I skipped over it
and just went to Exit.  I'll have to look at this screen again.  Using
Save probably would have helpded.  :)


If you press Exit, it asks whether you want to Save, Abort, or Cancel. 
Abort exits the partitioner without making changes. I just modified this 
so that it will only try to validate the disk setup if you press Save -- 
you don't need a valid setup if you are bailing on the partitioner, 
after all.



   - screen flips between a nice blue background (the curses
interface?) and a black background (running shell commands?) which is
quite jarring and slightly confusing;
   - screen elements go from nicely centred (curses interface?) and
then jump to the top-left corner of the screen (shell commands?) which
is also quite jarring and slightly confusing

Yes, this should be prettified. It's running a few things (passwd, adduser)
in a chroot, and I figured getting things working there was more important
than making them pretty for now.

It's a minor nit, as sysinstall does the same.  Maybe there's a way to
use text input fields (like the DHCP screens, and adduser screens from
sysinstall), then run the commands in the background, and just show
error/success messages?  [shrug] I know nothing about curses
programming.  :)


Yeah, I need to find time/a good way to do this (or someone else can: 
patches are always welcome). Text fields would work well, and I think 
even just making the banner at the top of the screen blue would help.

-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: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-03-04 Thread Freddie Cash
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Nathan Whitehorn
nwhiteh...@freebsd.org wrote:
 BSDinstall has acquired at this point its final form (prior to a future
 merge with pc-sysinstall), and I believe is ready to replace sysinstall on
 the 9.0 snapshot ISOs. Barring any objections, I would like to pull this
 switch 2 weeks from today, on the 14th of March.

 A patch to the release infrastructure code can be found here (make release
 must be run with Makefile.bsdinstall using this patch to get non-sysinstall
 media):
 http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/bsdinstall-release.diff

 Test ISOs for amd64 and i386 can be found here:
 http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/bsdinstall-amd64-20110222.iso.bz2
 http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/bsdinstall-i386-20110224.iso.bz2

 More recent test ISOs, as well as ones for other architectures, may be
 available at:
 http://wiki.freebsd.org/BSDInstall

Any chance of a memstick.img version being made available?

Or, does anyone have instructions on how to convert the ISO images
into memstick images?  Preferably using a Linux station, not a FreeBSD
station.

I have a beautiful 24-drive system here just crying out for testing
9-CURRENT and ZFSv28, but it doesn't have any bootable media except
USB sticks.  And the 2011-01-* memstick snapshot of 9-CURRENT fails
with can't create device node in /dev errors when trying to newfs
the CompactFlash disk that will be /.

-- 
Freddie Cash
fjwc...@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: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-03-04 Thread Vincent Hoffman
On 04/03/2011 20:24, Freddie Cash wrote:
 On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Nathan Whitehorn
 nwhiteh...@freebsd.org wrote:
 BSDinstall has acquired at this point its final form (prior to a future
 merge with pc-sysinstall), and I believe is ready to replace sysinstall on
 the 9.0 snapshot ISOs. Barring any objections, I would like to pull this
 switch 2 weeks from today, on the 14th of March.

 A patch to the release infrastructure code can be found here (make release
 must be run with Makefile.bsdinstall using this patch to get non-sysinstall
 media):
 http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/bsdinstall-release.diff

 Test ISOs for amd64 and i386 can be found here:
 http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/bsdinstall-amd64-20110222.iso.bz2
 http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/bsdinstall-i386-20110224.iso.bz2

 More recent test ISOs, as well as ones for other architectures, may be
 available at:
 http://wiki.freebsd.org/BSDInstall
 Any chance of a memstick.img version being made available?

 Or, does anyone have instructions on how to convert the ISO images
 into memstick images?  Preferably using a Linux station, not a FreeBSD
 station.

 I have a beautiful 24-drive system here just crying out for testing
 9-CURRENT and ZFSv28, but it doesn't have any bootable media except
 USB sticks.  And the 2011-01-* memstick snapshot of 9-CURRENT fails
 with can't create device node in /dev errors when trying to newfs
 the CompactFlash disk that will be /.

Its always worth having a go with the images from
http://pub.allbsd.org/FreeBSD-snapshots
http://pub.allbsd.org/FreeBSD-snapshots/amd64-amd64/9.0-HEAD-20110304-JPSNAP/cdrom/FreeBSD-9.0-HEAD-20110304-JPSNAP-amd64-amd64-memstick.img
for example.

Vince
___
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: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-03-03 Thread TAKAHASHI Yoshihiro
In article 4d6e6c43.4010...@freebsd.org
Nathan Whitehorn nwhiteh...@freebsd.org writes:

 Do you have a plan to add a floppy support as boot device?  Pc98
 machines which can boot from CD-ROM are very limited.  So we usually
 use FD for boot media to install.
 
 No, I hadn't thought about this. If there aren't any machines you care
 about that don't have a CD drive at all, we could try a
 CD-bootloader-on-a-floppy as a solution. I think a totally floppy
 based install would be very difficult to arrange, however.

The boot-only-floppy image is very useful for us.

---
TAKAHASHI Yoshihiro n...@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: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-03-03 Thread Paul Schenkeveld
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 09:36:58AM -0600, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
 On 02/28/11 09:20, John Baldwin wrote:
  On Monday, February 28, 2011 9:49:07 am Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
  There are some changes to the distribution format involved in this
  patch, which are outlined below, and about which I would also appreciate
  feedback:
  - The src tree is not split up into pieces (e.g. ssbin) as with sysinstall
  I would at least like to have src split up into two pieces:
 
  1) would be equivalent of sbase and ssys of old distributions, so you could
  choose to just install kernel sources along with the top-level Makefile bits
  to build kernels.  I commonly install this subset on production machines so 
  I
  can install a custom kernel in a pinch.
 
  2) would be everything else in the source tree.
 
 This is a little bit tricky, since it involves inter-distribution 
 dependencies which don't currently exist (e.g. you need sbase for ssys 
 to be useful, and for severythingelse to be useful). I suppose that the 
 top-level Makefile bits are small and could end up in both archives, 
 where one can overwrite the other with the same thing. Would that solve 
 your problem?
 -Nathan

Why not put the toplevel Makefiles, README and perhaps COPYRIGHT and
MAINTAINERS file into base?  This way there are no inter-dependencies
between src parts, /usr/src will consume only a modest bit of space
in base but documents wat ont would be able to do is sbase/ssys were
installed.

Regards,

Paul Schenkeveld
___
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: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-03-03 Thread Baptiste Daroussin
2011/3/3 Paul Schenkeveld free...@psconsult.nl:
 On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 09:36:58AM -0600, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
 On 02/28/11 09:20, John Baldwin wrote:
  On Monday, February 28, 2011 9:49:07 am Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
  There are some changes to the distribution format involved in this
  patch, which are outlined below, and about which I would also appreciate
  feedback:
  - The src tree is not split up into pieces (e.g. ssbin) as with sysinstall
  I would at least like to have src split up into two pieces:
 
  1) would be equivalent of sbase and ssys of old distributions, so you could
  choose to just install kernel sources along with the top-level Makefile 
  bits
  to build kernels.  I commonly install this subset on production machines 
  so I
  can install a custom kernel in a pinch.
 
  2) would be everything else in the source tree.

 This is a little bit tricky, since it involves inter-distribution
 dependencies which don't currently exist (e.g. you need sbase for ssys
 to be useful, and for severythingelse to be useful). I suppose that the
 top-level Makefile bits are small and could end up in both archives,
 where one can overwrite the other with the same thing. Would that solve
 your problem?
 -Nathan

 Why not put the toplevel Makefiles, README and perhaps COPYRIGHT and
 MAINTAINERS file into base?  This way there are no inter-dependencies
 between src parts, /usr/src will consume only a modest bit of space
 in base but documents wat ont would be able to do is sbase/ssys were
 installed.

 Regards,

 Paul Schenkeveld
 ___
 freebsd-a...@freebsd.org mailing list
 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
 To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-arch-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


While working on this maybe it would be interesting to now use makefs
instead of mkisofs, making installer generation 100% self hosting.

makefs has recently been updating to a recent version from netbsd and
now support iso9660, I already managed to create bootable livecd with
it.

regards,
Bapt
___
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: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-03-03 Thread Doug Barton

On 03/03/2011 02:22, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:


While working on this maybe it would be interesting to now use makefs
instead of mkisofs, making installer generation 100% self hosting.

makefs has recently been updating to a recent version from netbsd and
now support iso9660, I already managed to create bootable livecd with
it.


That would be very nice. There is a weird situation now where you can't 
do ISO creation within 'make release' without also building ports, which 
is a lot of overhead. I solved this problem by scripting the ISO 
creation as a separate step, but it felt kludgy to me.


Another nice improvement in this space would be to be able to select the 
specific ISO(s) that you want to create.



Doug

--

Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
-- OK Go

Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price.  :)  http://SupersetSolutions.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: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-03-02 Thread Nathan Whitehorn

On 02/28/11 09:20, John Baldwin wrote:

On Monday, February 28, 2011 9:49:07 am Nathan Whitehorn wrote:

BSDinstall has acquired at this point its final form (prior to a future
merge with pc-sysinstall), and I believe is ready to replace sysinstall
on the 9.0 snapshot ISOs. Barring any objections, I would like to pull
this switch 2 weeks from today, on the 14th of March.

A patch to the release infrastructure code can be found here (make
release must be run with Makefile.bsdinstall using this patch to get
non-sysinstall media):
http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/bsdinstall-release.diff

Hmm, does your installed world include the pre-built mergemaster database?
That should really be preserved.

It happens here in the old release Makefile:

# Install the system into the various distributions.
release.2:
 cd ${.CURDIR}/..  ${CROSSMAKE} distrib-dirs DESTDIR=${RD}/trees/base
 cd ${.CURDIR}/..  ${CROSSMAKE} ${WORLD_FLAGS} distributeworld \
 DISTDIR=${RD}/trees
 sh ${.CURDIR}/scripts/mm-mtree.sh -F ${CROSSENV} -D
${RD}/trees/base
 touch ${.TARGET}

I use a one-line patch locally to bootstrap etcupdate into the worlds I
package up at work via a similar one-liner.


And this is why sending out patches for review is a good idea. I've 
updated my code to call into this script, though it would be nice if, 
say, make distribution handled this. Thanks for pointing it out.



Test ISOs for amd64 and i386 can be found here:
http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/bsdinstall-amd64-20110222.iso.bz2
http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/bsdinstall-i386-20110224.iso.bz2

More recent test ISOs, as well as ones for other architectures, may be
available at:
http://wiki.freebsd.org/BSDInstall

Bug reports would be very appreciated at this time. There are three
known bugs currently, which will be fixed soon, so please don't report
these: error reporting is not graceful if there are no writable disks in
the system, you must select at least one optional component, and the doc
build is not currently connected to the releases.

There are some changes to the distribution format involved in this
patch, which are outlined below, and about which I would also appreciate
feedback:
- The src tree is not split up into pieces (e.g. ssbin) as with sysinstall

I would at least like to have src split up into two pieces:

1) would be equivalent of sbase and ssys of old distributions, so you could
choose to just install kernel sources along with the top-level Makefile bits
to build kernels.  I commonly install this subset on production machines so I
can install a custom kernel in a pinch.

2) would be everything else in the source tree.


This is a little bit tricky, since it involves inter-distribution 
dependencies which don't currently exist (e.g. you need sbase for ssys 
to be useful, and for severythingelse to be useful). I suppose that the 
top-level Makefile bits are small and could end up in both archives, 
where one can overwrite the other with the same thing. Would that solve 
your problem?

-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: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-03-02 Thread TAKAHASHI Yoshihiro
In article 4d6bb5e3.6020...@freebsd.org
Nathan Whitehorn nwhiteh...@freebsd.org writes:

 BSDinstall has acquired at this point its final form (prior to a
 future merge with pc-sysinstall), and I believe is ready to replace
 sysinstall on the 9.0 snapshot ISOs. Barring any objections, I would
 like to pull this switch 2 weeks from today, on the 14th of March.
 
 A patch to the release infrastructure code can be found here (make
 release must be run with Makefile.bsdinstall using this patch to get
 non-sysinstall media):
 http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/bsdinstall-release.diff

In Makefile.bsdinstall:

+cdrom:
+   echo kernel_options=\-C\  ${DISTDIR}/release/boot/loader.conf
+   sh /usr/src/release/${TARGET}/mkisoimages.sh -b FreeBSD_Install 
${DISTDIR}/release.iso ${DISTDIR}/release
+   rm ${DISTDIR}/release/boot/loader.conf

${TARGET} must be ${TARGET_ARCH} because pc98 and sunv4 don't have
mkisoimages.sh script.


Do you have a plan to add a floppy support as boot device?  Pc98
machines which can boot from CD-ROM are very limited.  So we usually
use FD for boot media to install.

---
TAKAHASHI Yoshihiro n...@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: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-03-02 Thread Nathan Whitehorn

On 03/02/11 10:06, TAKAHASHI Yoshihiro wrote:

In article4d6bb5e3.6020...@freebsd.org
Nathan Whitehornnwhiteh...@freebsd.org  writes:


BSDinstall has acquired at this point its final form (prior to a
future merge with pc-sysinstall), and I believe is ready to replace
sysinstall on the 9.0 snapshot ISOs. Barring any objections, I would
like to pull this switch 2 weeks from today, on the 14th of March.

A patch to the release infrastructure code can be found here (make
release must be run with Makefile.bsdinstall using this patch to get
non-sysinstall media):
http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/bsdinstall-release.diff

In Makefile.bsdinstall:

+cdrom:
+   echo kernel_options=\-C\  ${DISTDIR}/release/boot/loader.conf
+   sh /usr/src/release/${TARGET}/mkisoimages.sh -b FreeBSD_Install 
${DISTDIR}/release.iso ${DISTDIR}/release
+   rm ${DISTDIR}/release/boot/loader.conf

${TARGET} must be ${TARGET_ARCH} because pc98 and sunv4 don't have
mkisoimages.sh script.


I was thinking of just copying the i386/mkisoimages.sh and making the -G 
behavior the default. It seems to me to make more sense to use MACHINE 
than MACHINE_ARCH for this, since pc98 seems to have different 
requirements than i386. We could just copy the sparc64 install script 
for sun4v.

Do you have a plan to add a floppy support as boot device?  Pc98
machines which can boot from CD-ROM are very limited.  So we usually
use FD for boot media to install.


No, I hadn't thought about this. If there aren't any machines you care 
about that don't have a CD drive at all, we could try a 
CD-bootloader-on-a-floppy as a solution. I think a totally floppy based 
install would be very difficult to arrange, however.

-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: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-03-02 Thread John Baldwin
On Wednesday, March 02, 2011 10:36:58 am Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
 On 02/28/11 09:20, John Baldwin wrote:
  On Monday, February 28, 2011 9:49:07 am Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
  BSDinstall has acquired at this point its final form (prior to a future
  merge with pc-sysinstall), and I believe is ready to replace sysinstall
  on the 9.0 snapshot ISOs. Barring any objections, I would like to pull
  this switch 2 weeks from today, on the 14th of March.
 
  A patch to the release infrastructure code can be found here (make
  release must be run with Makefile.bsdinstall using this patch to get
  non-sysinstall media):
  http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/bsdinstall-release.diff
  Hmm, does your installed world include the pre-built mergemaster database?
  That should really be preserved.
 
  It happens here in the old release Makefile:
 
  # Install the system into the various distributions.
  release.2:
   cd ${.CURDIR}/..  ${CROSSMAKE} distrib-dirs 
  DESTDIR=${RD}/trees/base
   cd ${.CURDIR}/..  ${CROSSMAKE} ${WORLD_FLAGS} distributeworld \
   DISTDIR=${RD}/trees
   sh ${.CURDIR}/scripts/mm-mtree.sh -F ${CROSSENV} -D
  ${RD}/trees/base
   touch ${.TARGET}
 
  I use a one-line patch locally to bootstrap etcupdate into the worlds I
  package up at work via a similar one-liner.
 
 And this is why sending out patches for review is a good idea. I've 
 updated my code to call into this script, though it would be nice if, 
 say, make distribution handled this. Thanks for pointing it out.
 
  Test ISOs for amd64 and i386 can be found here:
  http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/bsdinstall-amd64-20110222.iso.bz2
  http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/bsdinstall-i386-20110224.iso.bz2
 
  More recent test ISOs, as well as ones for other architectures, may be
  available at:
  http://wiki.freebsd.org/BSDInstall
 
  Bug reports would be very appreciated at this time. There are three
  known bugs currently, which will be fixed soon, so please don't report
  these: error reporting is not graceful if there are no writable disks in
  the system, you must select at least one optional component, and the doc
  build is not currently connected to the releases.
 
  There are some changes to the distribution format involved in this
  patch, which are outlined below, and about which I would also appreciate
  feedback:
  - The src tree is not split up into pieces (e.g. ssbin) as with sysinstall
  I would at least like to have src split up into two pieces:
 
  1) would be equivalent of sbase and ssys of old distributions, so you could
  choose to just install kernel sources along with the top-level Makefile bits
  to build kernels.  I commonly install this subset on production machines so 
  I
  can install a custom kernel in a pinch.
 
  2) would be everything else in the source tree.
 
 This is a little bit tricky, since it involves inter-distribution 
 dependencies which don't currently exist (e.g. you need sbase for ssys 
 to be useful, and for severythingelse to be useful). I suppose that the 
 top-level Makefile bits are small and could end up in both archives, 
 where one can overwrite the other with the same thing. Would that solve 
 your problem?

Hmm, my thinking is ssys would include sbase, and severythingelse would
require ssys.  That is already true since libc needs syscall.mk from the
kernel sources anyway.  From a user perspective you end up with three
choices: no sources, kernel sources, or all sources.

-- 
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: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-02-28 Thread Bruce Cran
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 08:49:07 -0600
Nathan Whitehorn nwhiteh...@freebsd.org wrote:

 - There is only one CD image produced, which is always also a live CD

It would be really useful if a netinstall ISO could be made too -
people still have slow Internet connections where having a bootonly
disc is nice. For example Debian's 35 MB business-card CD is great when
you can only download at 50 kB/s.

-- 
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: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-02-28 Thread Nathan Whitehorn

On 02/28/11 08:56, Bruce Cran wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 08:49:07 -0600
Nathan Whitehornnwhiteh...@freebsd.org  wrote:


- There is only one CD image produced, which is always also a live CD

It would be really useful if a netinstall ISO could be made too -
people still have slow Internet connections where having a bootonly
disc is nice. For example Debian's 35 MB business-card CD is great when
you can only download at 50 kB/s.


Yes, I agree. The netinstall stuff is only really useful once the FTP 
mirrors start carrying the new distribution format, so it isn't hooked 
up yet. I've been keeping track of (and minimizing) the tools used by 
the installer, which should help select what things should do on this 
disk and in case we also want to produce some super-minimal TFTP-able 
MFS root in the future.

-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: Request for review/testing: switching the default installer

2011-02-28 Thread John Baldwin
On Monday, February 28, 2011 9:49:07 am Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
 BSDinstall has acquired at this point its final form (prior to a future 
 merge with pc-sysinstall), and I believe is ready to replace sysinstall 
 on the 9.0 snapshot ISOs. Barring any objections, I would like to pull 
 this switch 2 weeks from today, on the 14th of March.
 
 A patch to the release infrastructure code can be found here (make 
 release must be run with Makefile.bsdinstall using this patch to get 
 non-sysinstall media):
 http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/bsdinstall-release.diff

Hmm, does your installed world include the pre-built mergemaster database? 
That should really be preserved.

It happens here in the old release Makefile:

# Install the system into the various distributions.
release.2:
cd ${.CURDIR}/..  ${CROSSMAKE} distrib-dirs DESTDIR=${RD}/trees/base
cd ${.CURDIR}/..  ${CROSSMAKE} ${WORLD_FLAGS} distributeworld \
DISTDIR=${RD}/trees
sh ${.CURDIR}/scripts/mm-mtree.sh -F ${CROSSENV} -D 
${RD}/trees/base
touch ${.TARGET}

I use a one-line patch locally to bootstrap etcupdate into the worlds I 
package up at work via a similar one-liner.

 Test ISOs for amd64 and i386 can be found here:
 http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/bsdinstall-amd64-20110222.iso.bz2
 http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/bsdinstall-i386-20110224.iso.bz2
 
 More recent test ISOs, as well as ones for other architectures, may be 
 available at:
 http://wiki.freebsd.org/BSDInstall
 
 Bug reports would be very appreciated at this time. There are three 
 known bugs currently, which will be fixed soon, so please don't report 
 these: error reporting is not graceful if there are no writable disks in 
 the system, you must select at least one optional component, and the doc 
 build is not currently connected to the releases.
 
 There are some changes to the distribution format involved in this 
 patch, which are outlined below, and about which I would also appreciate 
 feedback:
 - The src tree is not split up into pieces (e.g. ssbin) as with sysinstall

I would at least like to have src split up into two pieces:

1) would be equivalent of sbase and ssys of old distributions, so you could 
choose to just install kernel sources along with the top-level Makefile bits 
to build kernels.  I commonly install this subset on production machines so I 
can install a custom kernel in a pinch.

2) would be everything else in the source tree.

 - Distfiles are not chunked, but are single xz-compressed archives
 - There is only one CD image produced, which is always also a live CD
 - There are no packages on this CD. There is about 100 MB of free space 
 on it right now, so it might make sense to keep it this way and to make 
 a separate packages CD/DVD. Removing packages from disc1 also makes 
 cross-building release ISOs possible.

Packages were always optional on disc1 anyway, but moving them completely off 
is probably ok.

-- 
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