hello
Well, after all that said, I would like to post my
modest oppinion based in experience from the market..
1) The people who use FreeBSD, or other OS, (the end user)
will never install the OS, the person will turn on the machine
and expects an graphical interface appears in the secreen.
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 09:56:00AM -0300, Sergio de Almeida Lenzi wrote:
hello
Well, after all that said, I would like to post my
modest oppinion based in experience from the market..
1) The people who use FreeBSD, or other OS, (the end user)
will never install the OS, the person
On Apr 29, 2009, at 2:51 PM, Jerry McAllister wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 09:56:00AM -0300, Sergio de Almeida Lenzi
wrote:
hello
Well, after all that said, I would like to post my
modest oppinion based in experience from the market..
1) The people who use FreeBSD, or other OS,
[Sorry Rolf]
One of the things I absolutely love about FreeBSD
is the 'Minimal Install' option. I can't tell you how
fast you can install and boot the base system but
its F-A-S-T! Then, I can fetch latest ports and
install _what_I_Want_ - not what someone else
thinks I *might* want. This gets
owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org
To: Mehmet Erol Sanliturk m.e.sanlit...@gmail.com
Cc: Tim Judd taj...@gmail.com; FreeBSD Questions Mailing List
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Sun Apr 26 19:00:07 2009
Subject: Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 14:52:56 -0400, Mehmet Erol
Sanliturk m.e.sanlit...@gmail.com
Cc: Tim Judd taj...@gmail.com; FreeBSD Questions Mailing List
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Sun Apr 26 19:00:07 2009
Subject: Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 14:52:56 -0400, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk
m.e.sanlit...@gmail.com wrote:
Last week I
On Sunday 26 April 2009 19:32:07 Polytropon wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 17:06:58 +0200, beni b...@brinckman.info wrote:
Why should a graphical installer have less functionality ?
hasn't been claimed. GUI installer just requires more resources,
more overhead.
Why should a GUI need more
On Sunday 26 April 2009 20:11:36 Neo [GC] wrote:
Just my two cents:
Why a graphical installer? Shure, it looks nice, easy, modern and more
accessable (examples: Mac OS X, Vista), but on the other hand, for me
FreeBSD never was intended to be fancy, but to be functional.
What is wrong with
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 20:24:53 +0200, beni b...@brinckman.info wrote:
On Sunday 26 April 2009 19:32:07 Polytropon wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 17:06:58 +0200, beni b...@brinckman.info wrote:
Why should a graphical installer have less functionality ?
hasn't been claimed. GUI installer just
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 20:33:46 +0200, beni b...@brinckman.info wrote:
What is wrong with fancy functional ? The two can go together I think.
Show me one example from the PC world.
For you
it may not be, but I would like it to be for me. And as to now, I don't have
any choice : there is no
Polytropon wrote:
...
There is NO thing that works for everyone, a one size fits all
egg-laying wool milk sow; in Germany, we call this eierlegende
Wollmilchsau, a device (or system) that does everything under
any circumstances, for everyone.
People are different, that's why there are many
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:39:38 -0400, Jerry McAllister jerr...@msu.edu wrote:
I have done hundreds of installations and still
find times that I want more information in the middle of things. That
is especially true if I try to add some packages at install time.
I agree with this. That's why I
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 08:33:46PM +0200, beni wrote:
On Sunday 26 April 2009 20:11:36 Neo [GC] wrote:
Just my two cents:
Why a graphical installer? Shure, it looks nice, easy, modern and more
accessable (examples: Mac OS X, Vista), but on the other hand, for me
FreeBSD never was
Jerry McAllister schrieb:
Second, that no one objects to a parallel installer being made available
as long as it is not the default and as long as it does not squeeze out
the text based installer.The only problem here is finding someone
or some group to work on it. Most FreeBSD developers
On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 17:45:49 -0600, Tim Judd taj...@gmail.com wrote:
If it's
a fast 686, default to a X environment.
I would always encourage using a text mode dialog FIRST. Such
as
Your system is able to run the graphical installer.
Do you want to launch it, or do you want to
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 02:18:55 +0200, Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se
wrote:
As long as you have sufficient RAM (and you don't actually need all that
much of it) running X on an older CPU should not be much of a problem.
(Unless X.org has bloated really badly over the last couple of years.)
software installation CPU/RAM needs), run the dialog(3) interface. If it's
a fast 686, default to a X environment.
nonsense. please stop this stupid discussion at all.
just use linux or windows (maybe PC-BSD) if it's important for you.
___
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 7:01 AM, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
software installation CPU/RAM needs), run the dialog(3) interface. If
it's
a fast 686, default to a X environment.
nonsense. please stop this stupid discussion at all.
just use linux or windows (maybe
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Rolf G Nielsen
listrea...@lazlarlyricon.com wrote:
And why is a graphical installer needed or even wanted? As several people,
including, I believe, Wojciech, pointed out, it would just make the
installation process slower without adding anything useful to
Glen Barber wrote:
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 7:01 AM, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
software installation CPU/RAM needs), run the dialog(3) interface. If
it's
a fast 686, default to a X environment.
nonsense. please stop this stupid discussion at all.
just use linux or
nonsense. please stop this stupid discussion
at all
Agreed. Only add GUI installer if it allows added functionality. Since
text mode can do everything GUI mode can do (with less overhead),
there is absolutely no reason to introduce a GUI installer.
Let's diverge onto discussing functionality
On Sunday 26 April 2009 16:23:58 Rolf G Nielsen wrote:
Glen Barber wrote:
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 7:01 AM, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
software installation CPU/RAM needs), run the dialog(3) interface. If
it's
a fast 686, default to a X environment.
El día Sunday, April 26, 2009 a las 10:59:07AM -0400, Daniel Underwood escribió:
nonsense. please stop this stupid discussion
at all
Sometimes I'm thinking in blacklist mails based on the Subject line in my
~/.procmailrc file; this thread 'Modern FreeBSD Installer?' for example
would deserve
I didn't say a graphical installer has less functionality. I said it
has no more.
On Sunday, April 26, 2009, beni b...@brinckman.info wrote:
On Sunday 26 April 2009 16:23:58 Rolf G Nielsen wrote:
Glen Barber wrote:
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 7:01 AM, Wojciech Puchar
snip
I've also thought about the concept of a web-ui installer, even if it's
run
from the local machine. The benefit of a webui installer is that you can
give the disk to someone, tell them to put it up on a publically
available
IP address and just sit back and let it run. but I
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 02:18:55 +0200, Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se
wrote:
Better would be to check (somehow) for the presence of a keyboard and
a screen. If those are not present forget about X. If they are
present then the user at least has a possibility of using X.
Deferring to the
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 17:06:58 +0200, beni b...@brinckman.info wrote:
Why should a graphical installer have less functionality ?
hasn't been claimed. GUI installer just requires more resources,
more overhead.
And what is wrong
with some eye candy ?
Eye candy is wrong exactly when it reduces
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 20:28:55 +0300, Giorgos Keramidas
keram...@ceid.upatras.gr wrote:
I think this is a reasonable approach to the problem of which
installation mode to launch. The default is `user friendly', [...]
No, the default is GUI. That's a big difference because
it entirely depends on
Just my two cents:
Why a graphical installer? Shure, it looks nice, easy, modern and more
accessable (examples: Mac OS X, Vista), but on the other hand, for me
FreeBSD never was intended to be fancy, but to be functional.
The text mode installer:
- works on every PC, every graphics card,
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Giorgos Keramidas keram...@ceid.upatras.gr
wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 02:18:55 +0200, Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se
wrote:
Better would be to check (somehow) for the presence of a keyboard and
a screen. If those are not present forget about X. If
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 20:11:36 +0200, Neo [GC] n...@gothic-chat.de wrote:
Just my two cents:
I may add two Eurocents. :-)
Why a graphical installer? Shure, it looks nice, easy, modern and more
accessable (examples: Mac OS X, Vista), but on the other hand, for me
FreeBSD never was intended
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 14:52:56 -0400, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk
m.e.sanlit...@gmail.com wrote:
For such reasons , personally , I hate
(1) auto-start installations .
Dangerous. Simply dangerous. Something as important an the
installation of an operating system should not rely on
assumptions and
I got cursed up in heaps on the debian-user list, because I had the gall
to assert that just installing a service shouldn't actually start it
running.
I said that because I had done a full Gnome install on my PowerMac 8500.
What I didn't realize ahead of time was that it was going to install
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 12:19:31 -0700, Michael David Crawford m...@prgmr.com
wrote:
I got cursed up in heaps on the debian-user list, because I had the gall
to assert that just installing a service shouldn't actually start it
running.
Security considerations apply here. As well as should the
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 19:44:10 +0200, Polytropon free...@edvax.de wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 20:28:55 +0300, Giorgos Keramidas
keram...@ceid.upatras.gr wrote:
I think this is a reasonable approach to the problem of which
installation mode to launch. The default is `user friendly', [...]
No,
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 14:52:56 -0400, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk
m.e.sanlit...@gmail.com wrote:
Last week I have installed Solaris 10 ( 2008-10 ) on a PC ( x86 )
having an Intel main board . It did not recognize Philips 220WS LCD (
1680 x 1050 ) monitor and selected itself a text-mode install and
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 10:20:00AM -0500, Martin McCormick wrote:
Wojciech Puchar writes:
as you can do everything easily in text mode, it just points out that GUI
installer is nonsense.
The real problem happens when the GUI is considered to
be all anybody needs.
I think there's no need
I think there's no need to worry (yet). Some of us use FreeBSD on
headless systems (which often don't even have the VGA and keyboard
circuitry). And of course, we install via remote serial consoles.
Anything purely GUI-oriented with no alternative would mean instant
migration to OpenBSD or
Reading the second half of these mailings got me thinking. Thinking of ways
to detect what CAN be done, and what CAN'T -- based entirely on the hardware
at boot. I think that we might come to a middle ground to get something
working. Here's my thought process right now, with hopefully ample
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 05:45:49PM -0600, Tim Judd wrote:
Reading the second half of these mailings got me thinking. Thinking of ways
to detect what CAN be done, and what CAN'T -- based entirely on the hardware
at boot. I think that we might come to a middle ground to get something
working.
On Wednesday 22 of April 2009 21:27:39 Fritz wrote:
Hi,
... When are you going to build
a modern installer for FreeBSD?
If I can add my 2 cents to this entire discusion, it will be nice if will be
the TUI which is similar to TUI done in Debian Lenny installer. You can do
simply next and back
As a computer user who happens to be blind and who has
done a ton of FreeBSD installs the headless way, I hope any new
installer will not absolutely require a GUI. If it can run in a
GUI mode, fine, but I hope it will still let one connect via a
serial port and direct the process that way.
done a ton of FreeBSD installs the headless way, I hope any new
installer will not absolutely require a GUI. If it can run in a
GUI mode, fine, but I hope it will still let one connect via a
serial port and direct the process that way.
as you can do everything easily in text mode, it just
a modern installer for FreeBSD?
If I can add my 2 cents to this entire discusion, it will be nice if will be
the TUI which is similar to TUI done in Debian Lenny installer. You can do
simply next and back option, you can easily choose betwen e.g ext3 or
reiserfs. It will be nice if we can also
Wojciech Puchar writes:
as you can do everything easily in text mode, it just points out that GUI
installer is nonsense.
The real problem happens when the GUI is considered to
be all anybody needs.
A certain wide-spread OS has gone that way and many
times, one discovers that
On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 12:27:39 -0700, Fritz fkolb...@q.com wrote:
As a big fan (and paying subscriber) of FreeBSD it pains
me to ask this question: When are you going to build
a modern installer for FreeBSD?
It has already been done. The modern installer is called sysinstall.
It covers many
On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 23:16:43 +0200 (CEST), Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
i don't understand WHY something has to be better just because it's
working in graphics mode.
The problem is that if the graphics isn't optional (if it's the
default), the whole thing is
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:59:53 +0300, Manolis Kiagias son...@otenet.gr wrote:
VirtualHost wrote:
Perhaps he doesn't want to specify what the
partioning would look like himself, unless he prefered to do it
otherwise.
The installer does this already, as far as I know.
Exactly. Modern
On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 17:07:54 -1000, Al Plant n...@hdk5.net wrote:
Gui installs have a tendency to hide things you need to tweak or alter
to suit a specific need.
That's a point especially when you want to turn an older 150 MHz
P1 into a worthful part of the IT society. :-)
No, honestly: If
The problem is that if the graphics isn't optional (if it's the
default), the whole thing is *limiting* the actions you can do
with it.
like installing over serial port or without mouse.
both i use
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Polytropon wrote:
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:59:53 +0300, Manolis Kiagias son...@otenet.gr wrote:
Exactly. Modern install does not necessarily mean GUI. FreeBSD *needs* a
text installer to work on old machines, headless servers, serial
consoles and the like. That being said, there are quite a
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 06:43:32 +0100, Matthew Seaman
m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk wrote:
So long as it maintains two other really useful features of the existing
sysinstall: [...]
* You answer all of the questions first, and only then does the installer
commit any irreversible
Good ways to go (for those who want it this way) are PC-BSD,
DesktopBSD and FreeSBIE.
or ever better - Windows. don't use imitations when you can get an
original!
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 10:00:24 +0300, Manolis Kiagias son...@otenet.gr wrote:
The text installer should always be the default, IMHO. A GUI installer
should be selectable i.e. from the boot options.
I hope Ivan Voras finds the time to continue with the finstall project,
it looked very promising:
Polytropon wrote:
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 10:00:24 +0300, Manolis Kiagias son...@otenet.gr wrote:
The text installer should always be the default, IMHO. A GUI installer
should be selectable i.e. from the boot options.
I hope Ivan Voras finds the time to continue with the finstall project,
it
The partitioner will allow you to create more partitions than the
FreeBSD partition table will allow. Rather than giving it the name of a
special file in the /dev/directory, it will name it just X. You can
create as many partitions named X as you like.
Then the newfs will fail.
I
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 2:52 AM, Polytropon free...@edvax.de wrote:
Let me state this: correct screen detection is already a problem
with the big X, how should a small installer get this right
with its limited resources? Mind this: The installer runs in a
very limited setting, while X can
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 12:50:46AM -0700, Michael David Crawford wrote:
The partitioner will allow you to create more partitions than the
FreeBSD partition table will allow. Rather than giving it the name of a
special file in the /dev/directory, it will name it just X. You can
create as
On 4/23/09, cpghost cpgh...@cordula.ws wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 12:50:46AM -0700, Michael David Crawford wrote:
The partitioner will allow you to create more partitions than the
FreeBSD partition table will allow. Rather than giving it the name of a
special file in the /dev/directory,
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 12:10:50AM +0200, Paul B. Mahol wrote:
On 4/23/09, cpghost cpgh...@cordula.ws wrote:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 12:50:46AM -0700, Michael David Crawford wrote:
The partitioner will allow you to create more partitions than the
FreeBSD partition table will allow. Rather
the number of possible partitions per slice is higher. I'd really wish
FreeBSD's bsdlabel(8) would allow for more partitions. The problem
here is not with sysinstall though. From bsdlabel(8):
that's isn't supported by sysinstall but you can partition a partition.
As a big fan (and paying subscriber) of FreeBSD it pains
me to ask this question: When are you going to build
a modern installer for FreeBSD?
what is missing in current to make anything else?
if you have some ideas about extending it - just tell, and even better -
send a patch
On Apr 22, 2009, at 12:27 PM, Fritz wrote:
Hi,
As a big fan (and paying subscriber)
Interesting-- I wasn't aware that the FreeBSD project had a paid
subscription model...?
...of FreeBSD it pains me to ask this question: When are you going
to build
a modern installer for FreeBSD?
I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Fritz wrote:
Hi,
As a big fan (and paying subscriber) of FreeBSD it pains
me to ask this question: When are you going to build
a modern installer for FreeBSD?
I looked at the list of projects and didn't see it there ... did
I miss
In response to Fritz fkolb...@q.com:
As a big fan (and paying subscriber) of FreeBSD it pains
me to ask this question: When are you going to build
a modern installer for FreeBSD?
I looked at the list of projects and didn't see it there ... did
I miss something?
This topic has been
Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Apr 22, 2009, at 12:27 PM, Fritz wrote:
Hi,
As a big fan (and paying subscriber)
Interesting-- I wasn't aware that the FreeBSD project had a paid
subscription model...?
Indeed, I fear my dues may be late.
...of FreeBSD it pains me to ask this question: When are
It would probably help if you state what you mean with modern.
Jerone
Fritz schreef:
Hi,
As a big fan (and paying subscriber) of FreeBSD it pains
me to ask this question: When are you going to build
a modern installer for FreeBSD?
I looked at the list of projects and didn't see it there ...
as better than sysinstall.
Once upon time, there was a Summer of Code projects set to develop a
graphical installer for FBSD 7.x. I don't know what happened to it, but also
agree there is no need for such a thing. Sysinstall may appear intimidating
but it's really quite easy to use once
IMHO numbers and letters look the same in the scary dark place, a TUI,
or GUI. Better device detection, faster, more packages, etc. would all
be better and should be more of a priority than making a GUI
exactly. GUI don't need to have any priority, it's just don't needed AT
ALL.
if fancy
Adam Vandemore wrote:
Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Apr 22, 2009, at 12:27 PM, Fritz wrote:
Hi,
As a big fan (and paying subscriber)
Interesting-- I wasn't aware that the FreeBSD project had a paid
subscription model...?
Indeed, I fear my dues may be late.
I suspect the OP has mingled the
-Original Message-
From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org
[mailto:owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Wojciech
Puchar
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 4:17 PM
To: Adam Vandemore
Cc: questi...@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
as better than sysinstall
Please, calm down a bit,
The original poster only revert to a modern' install, who knows what he
ment by this. Perhaps he doesn't want to specify what the partioning
would look like himself, unless he prefered to do it otherwise. The idea
that he insist on a graphicals installation is implied
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 01:34:13PM -0700, Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Apr 22, 2009, at 12:27 PM, Fritz wrote:
Hi,
As a big fan (and paying subscriber)
Interesting-- I wasn't aware that the FreeBSD project had a paid
subscription model...?
...of FreeBSD it pains me to ask this question:
VirtualHost wrote:
Please, calm down a bit,
The original poster only revert to a modern' install, who knows what
he ment by this. Perhaps he doesn't want to specify what the
partioning would look like himself, unless he prefered to do it
otherwise. The idea that he insist on a graphicals
Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Apr 22, 2009, at 12:27 PM, Fritz wrote:
Hi,
As a big fan (and paying subscriber)
Interesting-- I wasn't aware that the FreeBSD project had a paid
subscription model...?
...of FreeBSD it pains me to ask this question: When are you going to
build
a modern installer
Manolis Kiagias wrote:
Personally, I would like a text installer using a previous/next approach
that would give me options like:
- Install a Complete FreeBSD Base System = Subchoices: install
everything or select base system components
- Install Additional Software Packages
- Configure other
76 matches
Mail list logo
