Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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, (the end user) will never install the OS, the person will turn on the machine and expects an graphical interface appears in the secreen. I'm getting into this late, but I have installed FreeBSD many times, both as a desktop system and as a server. 3) the "computer" (computer is the term used by the USER) should NEVER break, stop working That is: the computer (and the Operating system) should act as the TV set... (remember those old times when the TV set used to break???) you turn it on, and it works... All "computers" work...until someone sits down at the keyboard. 5) A beautifull installer is good for the newspaper that publishes a "review" of the Operating system (they must publish something to "sell" to ...save their job..), Have you ever heard about a "Leopard" installer??? do you know someone who reinstalled "Leopard"?? Ummm...you're talking to someone who has installed Panther, Tiger and Leopard, more than once. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 will turn on the machine > and expects an graphical interface appears in the secreen. > > 2) the Interface should be as simple as possible, but powerfull > enought to fullfill their needs, that is text, email, browsing, > some banking, multimedia (this must be powerfulll...), chatting. > some dvd authoriting, P2P. should access WIFI networks easy too I don't think you understand how FreeBSD is used in most circumstances. As a server, these things would mostly be quite undesirable and an annoyance to have to remove - more of an annoyance than installing then from ports. jerry > > 3) the "computer" (computer is the term used by the USER) should > NEVER break, stop working That is: the computer (and the Operating > system) should act as the TV set... (remember those old times when the TV set > used to break???) you turn it on, and it works... > > 4) For those who install the OS in the computer, (some 1 in 10.000) people > should make it fast and dirty I make an installer that install FBSD in > 10 minutes > with all the gnome, office, multimedia, with only one of the > keyboard... > using ZFS, the system never breaks, is ready to use in 20 seconds... FBSD is > installed > in more than 1000 machines running in gas stations... here... > > 5) A beautifull installer is good for the newspaper that publishes a "review" > of > the Operating system (they must publish something to "sell" to ...save their > job..), > Have you ever heard about a "Leopard" installer??? do you know someone who > reinstalled "Leopard"?? > > 6) I also think that there must be an "fast and dirty" FBSD install. in the > distribution > a CD (or DVD) that you put in the machine, it asks where to install and a > prompt choosing YES or NO... > the installer formats the disk(partition), do a tar of the FBSD image, with > an login of "admin" prompts for > a password, and dumps the os image in the disk using journal or ZFS... > (90% of the machines I installed FBSD have 1GB of memory, 80GB of HD and HDA > sound, > INTEL,ATI,VIA graphics board... only 4 brands of NIC). > > 7) I showed FBSD to an "expert" windows guy, and he think it is far more easy > to install than > the XP he was using besides, it is LEGAL!!! > > Thanks for the Attention, > > Sergio > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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. 2) the Interface should be as simple as possible, but powerfull enought to fullfill their needs, that is text, email, browsing, some banking, multimedia (this must be powerfulll...), chatting. some dvd authoriting, P2P. should access WIFI networks easy too 3) the "computer" (computer is the term used by the USER) should NEVER break, stop working That is: the computer (and the Operating system) should act as the TV set... (remember those old times when the TV set used to break???) you turn it on, and it works... 4) For those who install the OS in the computer, (some 1 in 10.000) people should make it fast and dirty I make an installer that install FBSD in 10 minutes with all the gnome, office, multimedia, with only one of the keyboard... using ZFS, the system never breaks, is ready to use in 20 seconds... FBSD is installed in more than 1000 machines running in gas stations... here... 5) A beautifull installer is good for the newspaper that publishes a "review" of the Operating system (they must publish something to "sell" to ...save their job..), Have you ever heard about a "Leopard" installer??? do you know someone who reinstalled "Leopard"?? 6) I also think that there must be an "fast and dirty" FBSD install. in the distribution a CD (or DVD) that you put in the machine, it asks where to install and a prompt choosing YES or NO... the installer formats the disk(partition), do a tar of the FBSD image, with an login of "admin" prompts for a password, and dumps the os image in the disk using journal or ZFS... (90% of the machines I installed FBSD have 1GB of memory, 80GB of HD and HDA sound, INTEL,ATI,VIA graphics board... only 4 brands of NIC). 7) I showed FBSD to an "expert" windows guy, and he think it is far more easy to install than the XP he was using besides, it is LEGAL!!! Thanks for the Attention, Sergio ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
[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 top marks in my opinion. I guess for desktop users there might be an option "X-Windows + KDE" or Gnome or XFCE and you get base plus X plus GUI ~ there probably is but I never used them at all :) Sorry if this has been said before ;-) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 see other issues as higher priority concerns and will be putting their effort in to those concerns rather than in to a GUI installer. ACK. No one really _needs_ a GUI installer, there are far more important tasks to do. So, don't try to make an argument that doesn't exist. Nobody minds if you write a fantastic GUI installer and submit it for inclusion as long as it works well and doesn't eclipse other necessities. ACK too. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 intended to be fancy, but to be functional. > > What is wrong with fancy functional ? The two can go together I think. > 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 fancy, easy, nice, modern and > accessable installer. You are missing the two key things that have been said. First, that a GUI installer will not work on many systems that FreeBSD powers and in some circumstances for which it is used. Those in particular are headless servers - a major use of FreeBSD - and where it is being used by persons who need special communication tools such as the blind. So, for those large number of cases a text based installer needs to be retained, though if someone were able to improve it in some way, that would be OK. 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 see other issues as higher priority concerns and will be putting their effort in to those concerns rather than in to a GUI installer. So, don't try to make an argument that doesn't exist. Nobody minds if you write a fantastic GUI installer and submit it for inclusion as long as it works well and doesn't eclipse other necessities. jerry ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:39:38 -0400, Jerry McAllister 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 always included a F1 Help in my "paintings" of how an improvement of the text mode installer (and a possible GUI installer) should go. Another idea would be to add something of value to the help text. Let it be not only an explaination, but a suggestion, just like "if you have ... then consider using ...; if you want to use ..., then you better set ... and ...". An addition that comes to my mind right now would be a kind of autodetection of existing operating systems on the disk, which obsoletes (or easyfies) the boot manager dialog. For example, if FreeBSD is the only OS, the default choice would surely be "install FreeBSD's MBR", so the only OS will boot. If there are other OSes, the boot manager could be suggested. This idea continues into a "autodetect for partition editor", which could look like this: automount Device Mountpoint No R/O R/W Explaination /dev/ad0s1a / [ ] [ ] [x] FreeBSD's root /dev/ad0s1d /tmp[ ] [ ] [x] Temporary files /dev/ad0s1e /var[ ] [ ] [x] Stuff /dev/ad0s1f /usr[ ] [ ] [x] Much more stuff /dev/ad0s1g /home [ ] [ ] [x] Your stuff other than FreeBSD --- /dev/ad2s1 /blabla [ ] [x] [ ] Linux stuff /dev/ad2s2 /foobar [x] [ ] [ ] FAT32 I've excluded options like "format yes/no" and file system type for easyfication. :-) The idea would be that /etc/fstab would be populated with everything that exist, keeping the default that noauto is chosen, and -o ro, unless the user specifies something else on his own risk. And again, a multi-lingual installer is an idea. In fact, it's NOT an idea, because - and I may speak only based on my experiences in my home country - those who install FreeBSD are familiar with the english language, and those who are not familiar with the english language wouldn't even know FreeBSD. :-) > But, I agree that we must not give up on a 'text based' installer that > is the most generally usable, even if some other options might be made > available.The text based installer could also be massaged a bit > to make it a little easier to understand as well, without losing its > functionality. Completely agree. -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 ways to go for them to choose from. In the past, I chose DOS for some things, OS/ES for others, and later on, Linux; today, FreeBSD is my choice. I can't tell what I will use in the future, because I don't know my requirements of tomorrow. Things may change. FreeBSD is an operating system that has so much potential, and can be used in many different fields of work (and play, and entertainment, and learning). One of the reasons it's so versatile is the fact that it runs on minimum conditions, still offering the whole power. You run the same OS on a 150 MHz P1 as you run on a 5 million GHz Uber-server. THAT is modern. :-) Well said. As I've come to expect from Polyptron. And by that, I hope this godforsaken discussion has come to an end. As there's no such thing as an "eierlegende Wollmilchsau", there will always be people who object, no matter how things are done, and I cannot see the point in continuing this any further. -- Rolf Nielsen ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 20:33:46 +0200, beni 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 fancy, easy, nice, modern and accessable installer. You're mixing terminology again. "Modern"... okay, we already stated that this is depending on defintion. "Accessible"... how accessible is a GUI installer via a serial line or by a blind user? > So why don't use a text mode for server and a GUI for desktop ? Because FreeBSD is for both servers and desktops and mixed forms, and you cannot determine from the hardware present what form the user wants to install, or where the form will develop into. That's why a choice at a very early stage of the installation would be needed, and its default should be fail-safe, read: text mode is default, GUI when ordered. > Oh so all those desktopusers with Gnome/KDE/... will gladly hear this ! As a > desktopuser I can't be a professional who wants a perfectly working system ? > Thanks. Terminology again. What do you understand by "professional"? But let this not be our topic. The point is that many ways of operating and administrating a system highly depend on the knowledge, the experience and the intelligency of the user, as well as on his attitude towards learning things. PC-BSD and DesktopBSD to the right thing for those "lazy" guys: Most things are preconfigured and work out of the box, and when you need configuration changes, there are GUI tools for it. As long as you're fine with this setting, you won't have ANY problem. > Even with pc-bsd not all my hardware is recognized > now. That's not PC-BSD's fault. > But if you want something that works for everyone, I don't think that > *bsd or linux is something for you. 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 ways to go for them to choose from. In the past, I chose DOS for some things, OS/ES for others, and later on, Linux; today, FreeBSD is my choice. I can't tell what I will use in the future, because I don't know my requirements of tomorrow. Things may change. FreeBSD is an operating system that has so much potential, and can be used in many different fields of work (and play, and entertainment, and learning). One of the reasons it's so versatile is the fact that it runs on minimum conditions, still offering the whole power. You run the same OS on a 150 MHz P1 as you run on a 5 million GHz Uber-server. THAT is modern. :-) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 20:24:53 +0200, beni wrote: > On Sunday 26 April 2009 19:32:07 Polytropon wrote: > > On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 17:06:58 +0200, beni 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 functionality than a text based installer ? Hasn't been claimed, too. > Why > can't both have the same functionality ? A GUI installer is acceptable as long as it has AT LEAST the functionalities that the respective (existing) text mode installer already has. If it offers additional functionalities, well, fine, but it shouldn't be limited. > But why should a GUI be less functional ? I don't see why ! A GUI *IS* less functional if implemented poorly, that's the point. It's not better or worse per se. Keep in mind that it has - by definition - another playing field, so a GUI installer cannot be handled via serial console, and cannot be used by blind users. > I'm not a sysadmin, indeed. But it should surprise me a lot if a admin who > has > to, as you say yourself, keep every server running, need to (re)install a lot > of servers on a regular basis. Then there is something seriously wrong. It > was > my believe that a server needs to be kept running, not being reinstalled > twice > a week (with or without a GUI installer). Exactly. That's why I mentioned that an installer is a very important piece of software, but you don't use it day by day. You only use it occassionally, but in such a situation, it has to offer the functionalities needed and a predictable way of working. > And so a desktop user has to do it with the prehistoric sysinstall... And I > don't value an OS by its installer, but as a desktop user I think I have > already done a bit of (re)installations, be it debian, ubuntu, suse, or > Micros~1 in different flavors. Another polite question: What makes you believe that a GUI installer for FreeBSD - if it existed - would work (read: look and feel) exactly the same as the installers you already know from various Linusi or "Windows"? Maybe a different approach (other than "next, next, next, yes, okay, next, next, reboot) is taken? It's at least possible... > > As I explained in an earlier post: If the GUI installer is > > (a) not the only way, (b) not an auto-default, (c) does work > > well enough even on older hardware and (d) doesn't make things > > more complicated, I wouldn't have any problem with it, I would > > even use it! > > Nice to hear it :-) Me too ! I have some experience with PC-BSD and DesktopBSD. Their installers behave the way MICROS~1 users would expect them to work, and I think most Linusi (with GUI installers) do work the same way. > A pc-bsd is installed in what, 5 or 6 clics (if it is that much). Same for > windows [...] Hahaha! :-) > [...] or ubuntu. Text based installation takes more time i think. Finetuning > and installing programs afterwards takes more time, but that is the same for > all those OS'es, no ? No. The installer of FreeBSD lets you do much more than those "5 click installers". This is neccessary because FreeBSD is, as I already mentioned, a multi-purpose OS that can be run on a server, a desktop, or a mixed form. Because there are not hundreds of different distributions aiming at different groups of users, the installer has to offer everything that is needed - by the desktop user and by the server admin. So, of couse, yes, things are more detailed, more complex. But if you're intending to run FreeBSD anyway, that isn't a problem. Maybe a FreeBSD installer could be implemented with "5 times pressing the ENTER key", but it would imply that there are many decisions to be taken away from the user and substituted by default values, such as: - wipe the entire disk - create one slice with one / partition - put everything into the partition - install everything from the CD - install all services - start all services You know where this is going... > So I think we will agree to disagree... And this is my receipt for your receipt. :-) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 fancy functional ? The two can go together I think. 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 fancy, easy, nice, modern and accessable installer. > The text mode installer: > - works on every PC, every graphics card, every screen, with serial > console, with ssh, with screenreader > - is easy enough for people who are able to use it after the installation > - doesn't need a mouse to be usable So why don't use a text mode for server and a GUI for desktop ? > FreeBSD isn't Linux/OSX/Windows, FreeBSD is not for users who want > eyecandy, FreeBSD is for professinals who want perfectly working > systems, who know how to edit .conf-files, which packages the need and > so on. (at least I think so) Oh so all those desktopusers with Gnome/KDE/... will gladly hear this ! As a desktopuser I can't be a professional who wants a perfectly working system ? Thanks. > IMHO, the biggest problem with graphical installers is that they just > don't work for everyone. For example, my last attempts to install Ubuntu > Linux stopped when the installer didn't work with my graphics card or > just choosed a mode my TFT didn't support. This was such a bad > experience, I didn't wanted to try it anymore. Well, my first install of windows/debian/freebsd/... didn't work out as it was supposed to be either. So ? Even with pc-bsd not all my hardware is recognized now. But if you want something that works for everyone, I don't think that *bsd or linux is something for you. -- Beni. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Sunday 26 April 2009 19:32:07 Polytropon wrote: > On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 17:06:58 +0200, beni 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 functionality than a text based installer ? Why can't both have the same functionality ? > > And what is wrong > > with some eye candy ? > > Eye candy is wrong exactly when it reduces functionality > (instead of adding it). For example, if you need more time > for an installation, require a mouse, or can't use your > Braille readout anymore - then it's wrong- Or better: It's > useless. But why should a GUI be less functional ? I don't see why ! > > Guys, please, wake up, we don't live in the 70's anymore > > ! > > That's why FreeBSD is not following strange MICROS~1 concepts > of how to do several things. :-) > > > I'm using pc-bsd. Why ? Cause of the easy and nice installer. It's as > > simple as that. > > You value an operating system by how the installer LOOKS like? > I'm sure you're kidding. :-) > > Honestly: People can't be that stupid. Oh wait... okay, I didn't > say anything. :-) > > The point is - what I would have better said instead of the > previous two paragraphs - a text mode installer LOOKS more > serious. Serious biznis, you know? Servers, and workstations, > and operating system. For work to be done. Lots of work. Ask > people who work as admins, who keep mailservers running, > webservers, application servers. Do they choose the OS by the > amount of eye candy in the INSTALLER? I'm sure they don't. I'm not a sysadmin, indeed. But it should surprise me a lot if a admin who has to, as you say yourself, keep every server running, need to (re)install a lot of servers on a regular basis. Then there is something seriously wrong. It was my believe that a server needs to be kept running, not being reinstalled twice a week (with or without a GUI installer). And so a desktop user has to do it with the prehistoric sysinstall... And I don't value an OS by its installer, but as a desktop user I think I have already done a bit of (re)installations, be it debian, ubuntu, suse, or Micros~1 in different flavors. > > And before anyone says "do it yourself", "get a sponsor" or something > > down those lines : if it is all about choice, why not give the > > people/user the choice ? Now I don't have any choice : sysinstall or > > pc-bsd... > > Or DesktopBSD. :-) > > > I'm for both : text and graphical :-) > > As I explained in an earlier post: If the GUI installer is > (a) not the only way, (b) not an auto-default, (c) does work > well enough even on older hardware and (d) doesn't make things > more complicated, I wouldn't have any problem with it, I would > even use it! Nice to hear it :-) Me too ! > But please note that many users of FreeBSD are scared by the > way other GUI driven installers work. Much time is needed to > do an installation, and there's more emphasize put on how > things look instead of how they work. So I can understand > everyone who says: "When FreeBSD gets a crappy installerjust > like 'Windows' and some Linusi, then I would look around for > another OS that fits my needs." A pc-bsd is installed in what, 5 or 6 clics (if it is that much). Same for windows or ubuntu. Text based installation takes more time i think. Finetuning and installing programs afterwards takes more time, but that is the same for all those OS'es, no ? So I think we will agree to disagree... -- Beni. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 02:28:53AM -0500, Gary Gatten wrote: > I'm trying to ignore this thread, but as an infrequent installer, I think it > would be nice for those of us with limited experience to have a context > sensitive help to explain the various install options, such as: what it > is/does, how much disk space, how many/which dependancies, estimated install > time, etc. I don't care if its TUI or GUI - just something to help me make > the various selections at install time. With my luck such a thing is already > there and I just don't know about it, but thought I'd throw it out. I would go for this. 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. But, I agree that we must not give up on a 'text based' installer that is the most generally usable, even if some other options might be made available.The text based installer could also be massaged a bit to make it a little easier to understand as well, without losing its functionality. Read Jordan Hubbard's white paper whose URL was posted a few days ago. It clarifies things a lot. http://people.freebsd.org/~jkh/package-and-install.txt Probably even more could be said, but that gives an essential frame of reference. jerry > > - Original Message - > From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org > > To: Mehmet Erol Sanliturk > Cc: Tim Judd ; FreeBSD Questions Mailing List > > 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 > 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 also > > booted in text mode. > > > > I moved its hard disk to a PC with an Asus main board having an > > attached CRT Philips 109B6 ( maximum resolution : 1920 x 1440 ) > > monitor . Since boards were different , Solaris 10 could not boot . I > > started an upgrade installation . During that time it become necessary > > to leave PC for a while assuming that installation will wait . With > > its count down and start by itself in its GUI mode . it started to > > install automatically . > > > > At the end , the install become useless because its default detections > > were not what parts were there ( I think it used previously detected > > parts without checking the present parts except monitor and perhaps > > some others , I do not know exactly .) . > > That's why there should be at least the option of a text-mode install > (and it should probably be the default, as Polytropon wrote). I also > hate it when an installer fails to autodetect my video adapter and ends > up showing me a useless blank screen or, even worse, an equally useless > 'out of range' monitor message! > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > > > > > > > > > "This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient > and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. > If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that > any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email > and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have > received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by > return email and delete this email from your system." > > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
I'm trying to ignore this thread, but as an infrequent installer, I think it would be nice for those of us with limited experience to have a context sensitive help to explain the various install options, such as: what it is/does, how much disk space, how many/which dependancies, estimated install time, etc. I don't care if its TUI or GUI - just something to help me make the various selections at install time. With my luck such a thing is already there and I just don't know about it, but thought I'd throw it out. - Original Message - From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org To: Mehmet Erol Sanliturk Cc: Tim Judd ; FreeBSD Questions Mailing List 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 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 also > booted in text mode. > > I moved its hard disk to a PC with an Asus main board having an > attached CRT Philips 109B6 ( maximum resolution : 1920 x 1440 ) > monitor . Since boards were different , Solaris 10 could not boot . I > started an upgrade installation . During that time it become necessary > to leave PC for a while assuming that installation will wait . With > its count down and start by itself in its GUI mode . it started to > install automatically . > > At the end , the install become useless because its default detections > were not what parts were there ( I think it used previously detected > parts without checking the present parts except monitor and perhaps > some others , I do not know exactly .) . That's why there should be at least the option of a text-mode install (and it should probably be the default, as Polytropon wrote). I also hate it when an installer fails to autodetect my video adapter and ends up showing me a useless blank screen or, even worse, an equally useless 'out of range' monitor message! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" "This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system." ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 14:52:56 -0400, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk 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 also > booted in text mode. > > I moved its hard disk to a PC with an Asus main board having an > attached CRT Philips 109B6 ( maximum resolution : 1920 x 1440 ) > monitor . Since boards were different , Solaris 10 could not boot . I > started an upgrade installation . During that time it become necessary > to leave PC for a while assuming that installation will wait . With > its count down and start by itself in its GUI mode . it started to > install automatically . > > At the end , the install become useless because its default detections > were not what parts were there ( I think it used previously detected > parts without checking the present parts except monitor and perhaps > some others , I do not know exactly .) . That's why there should be at least the option of a text-mode install (and it should probably be the default, as Polytropon wrote). I also hate it when an installer fails to autodetect my video adapter and ends up showing me a useless blank screen or, even worse, an equally useless 'out of range' monitor message! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 19:44:10 +0200, Polytropon wrote: > On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 20:28:55 +0300, Giorgos Keramidas > 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 the user. Imagine a bline user. Is GUI user friendly for > him? No, because he has zero output on his Braille line. The installer > does something and he doesn't even notice. [...] > You have 30 seconds to make a selection. If no selection > is made, the text mode installer (fail-safe mode) will > be launched. This is a reasonable choice too. I wasn't very clear but I tend to favor text mode installations. This is also why I used quotes around `user friendly'. My main point was that if there *is* a GUI installer, it should only _one_ of the options, and text-mode installation should remain with us for all users who want it (including me). ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 12:19:31 -0700, Michael David Crawford 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 system recognize any media and automount it -o rw by default without asking?", this can cause problems. Or at least confusion. For example, when I put in a blank CD or DVD, maybe I don't want to use it right now, but later? But suddenly, a burning application pops up and annoys me. > Apple doesn't have a problem providing GUI installers for Macintoshes > because they have the full specs on all the video cards, and lots of > engineers and QA personnel. Yes, Apple can do that, no problem. But FreeBSD runs on the "good" PC x86 stuff, where manufacturers are known for not sticking to existing standards, and where developers have to reverse-engineer or trial+error to get things working. This is not a good condition for an installer. > Just about every day I read on the FreeBSD-Current list about ZFS > failing or even crashing the whole system. There are many, many > profound benefits a reliable ZFS implementation could bring to the > community. That would be a better use of the community's limited resources. Completely agree. When I see how great ZFS runs on Solaris, I wish to have this on FreeBSD rather than a colourful GUI installer that I only use one time per 5 years. :-) Remember: The installer is a thing you only use once. Of course, the "first sight" effect may apply here, and the judging about this effect is mainly influenced by previous experiences with OS installations. So if you come from OpenBSD or LFS, you'll say, "Wow, what a comfortable and nice installer!", while others may say: "This is DOS!" :-) Much more important are tools you use more than one time, and again, PC-BSD and DesktopBSD offer nice GUI tools for system administration (desktopbsd-tools can be installed on a "pure" FreeBSD from the ports), so no need to re-invent the wheel here. Those who insist on GUI tools already have their answers, and those who administer their system "purely" won't even touch these tools. -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 gdm, the Gnome Display Manager - Gnome's version of an X11 login prompt. Unfortunately, the X server didn't recognize my video, so I was presented with a black screen and no way to get out of X11. I don't remember exactly how I fixed that, but I do recall that the whole process was very painful and that I had to remove gdm. Apple doesn't have a problem providing GUI installers for Macintoshes because they have the full specs on all the video cards, and lots of engineers and QA personnel. But Open Source developers often have incomplete specs, and are chronically lacking in coders with the needed expertise. They're often lacking in hardware to test with as well. I can see all kinds of reason why a graphical installer would be nice - but it shouldn't be there at all unless you can count on it working reliably. The appeal of a nice installer is probably not worth the effort it would require to achieve that reliability. Just about every day I read on the FreeBSD-Current list about ZFS failing or even crashing the whole system. There are many, many profound benefits a reliable ZFS implementation could bring to the community. That would be a better use of the community's limited resources. Mike -- Michael David Crawford m...@prgmr.com prgmr.com - We Don't Assume You Are Stupid. Xen-Powered Virtual Private Servers: http://prgmr.com/xen ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 14:52:56 -0400, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk 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 guessings... "the user will want to install me on one slice, I wipe the whole disk, then put everything into one big / partition, and by the way, install KDE and all kinds of servers which I run automatically, if needed or not, because sometimes someone could need some of the services." > (2) auto-detect parts without asking correctness of detection when its > conclusion is not verifiable > by the installers > [...] > ( erroneously detection of monitor resolutions and using a default > resolution which is not usable >due to mismatch to display characteristics of the monitor ) ... ) In regards of X, this happens often enough. A possible workaround would be some kind of fail-safe minimal setting, such as 800x600 which should (!) work everywhere. Of course, all the display stuff of the installer would need to fit onto a 800x600 screen. If not - big problem: cannot reach controls, even cannot see them. > With respect to experiences gained continuously installing operating systems > , my idea about FreeBSD sysinstal is that it is an excellent installation > system developed by very conscious persons which they know what to do very > well . The installer, on the other hand, relies on the user - that he knows what he's doing. If I just go there and clickityclick, I can't expect the system to read my mind. :-) > The points I suggested for improvements are toward to make it easy for the > beginners . For a computing system , to satisfy needs of both beginners and > expert users is not a very easy task . This could be achieved through "installation profiles" with a well-intended set of selections (partition, things to install, preconfiguration). The installers of PC-BSD and DesktopBSD exactly do this already. They offer a preconfigured X / KDE environment for average users. The installation process is made so easy that it's quite impossible to fail here. > Making a part easy for a group may > make it difficult for other group . Difficult, and, in the following, impossible. This will be the point when even long-time FreeBSD users will abandon this system. > Using defaults is not always correct > due to hardware detection difficulties . Any defaults should be as fail-safe as possible, and that's a very hard question how to set them. > My inclination is toward the beginners as much as possible because this > approach will enlarge FreeBSD user group . And again, I may say that PC-BSD and DesktopBSD exactly do this. Those who want to use "pure FreeBSD" are usually intelligent (sorry) enough to have no problems with sysinstall. Anything than sysinstall makes it harder for them to learn, and finally, it's about learning when you're using an operating system. > When I was in University a research assistant was working toward a PhD in > Ergonomy by researching user interface software design principles to reduce > the human errors during control of a system ( for example , effects of menu > depths ) . It starts way before this point: You have three buttons. Which to make the default button? Human perception. Use colours. Which colours? Colour blindness, anyone? Attention distraction. Where to put the buttons? What to put on the screen along with them? Giving an alert: How? I could go on for hours. :-) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 20:11:36 +0200, "Neo [GC]" 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 to be fancy, but to be functional. I think the majority of FreeBSD users chose FreeBSD because of this simple consideration. If I wanted a bloated system that requires the most recent hardware, gets usable after 3 minutes and does the same as an operating system 5 years ago, well, I wouldn't use FreeBSD then. I won't say FreeBSD is for servers only. Because it is a multi-purpose OS, it can be run on servers, desktops and mixed forms. I'm using it on the desktop EXCLUSIVELY since 4.0, without problems. Because it doesn't require re-installs every few weeks (as famous "modern" OSes do), I don't need a GUI in the installer, because I have enough GUI when the system is up and running. > The text mode installer: > - works on every PC, every graphics card, every screen, with serial > console, with ssh, with screenreader Exactly. The GUI installer simply cannot run on a serial console. That's nothing bad per se, X can't run on a serial console either, but the principle of GUI dictates that I won't work on a serial console. > - is easy enough for people who are able to use it after the installation It's really easy if you can read and have a minimum knowledge about what you're doing. If you don't know anything, can't read and are stupid, you shouldn't try to install an operating system on a computer. :-) > - doesn't need a mouse to be usable That's why I mentioned the keyboard even in regards of a GUI installer. As long as it can be used without a mouse, only by the keyboard, it's okay. > FreeBSD isn't Linux/OSX/Windows, FreeBSD is not for users who want > eyecandy, FreeBSD is for professinals who want perfectly working > systems, who know how to edit .conf-files, which packages the need and > so on. (at least I think so) I'd agree with this. > IMHO, the biggest problem with graphical installers is that they just > don't work for everyone. That's right. Because modern X (and you can't use old X) requires a quite up-to-date system, older machines that can be used very well for FreeBSD cannot even be installed. X has problems on a running system, how can we expect it to be part of such a basic operational routine as an OS installer? > For example, my last attempts to install Ubuntu > Linux stopped when the installer didn't work with my graphics card or > just choosed a mode my TFT didn't support. This was such a bad > experience, I didn't wanted to try it anymore. And this experience could scare away potential users who have heared or read that FreeBSD is a versatile and powerful OS. And then, they are presented a child-play installer with beeps and whistles, with dancing elephants and funny bunny, and suddenly, the system hangs, reboots, and they won't know why. Can you imagine they'll try a second time? :-) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 02:18:55 +0200, Erik Trulsson > 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 user all the decisions that are impossible to make with > a reasonable chance of doing the Right Thing for everyone seems ok too. > > Solaris has been shipping for quite some time with an installer that can > run on serial consoles, an installer that can launch a simple > terminal-based session under X11, and an installer that can launch a > Java GUI version in all its bloated glory. > > The decision of which installer to launch is left to the user who sits > on the boot console, who is presented with a simple menu like: > >+---+ >| | >| Please select installation type (default = 3): _ | >| | >| 1. Text-only console installation. | >| | >| 2. Terminal based GUI installation. | >| | >| 3. Dialog driven GUI installation. | >| | >+---+ > > There is also a timeout that launches the user-friendly GUI dialogs > after a few seconds. > > I think this is a reasonable approach to the problem of which > installation mode to launch. The default is `user friendly', there is a > timeout so the installer won't get stuck forever in the prompt, and > there is still an option for a plain console-based installation for > everyone who wants to go that way. > > _ > 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 also booted in text mode . I moved its hard disk to a PC with an Asus main board having an attached CRT Philips 109B6 ( maximum resolution : 1920 x 1440 ) monitor . Since boards were different , Solaris 10 could not boot . I started an upgrade installation . During that time it become necessary to leave PC for a while assuming that installation will wait . With its count down and start by itself in its GUI mode . it started to install automatically . At the end , the install become useless because its default detections were not what parts were there ( I think it used previously detected parts without checking the present parts except monitor and perhaps some others , I do not know exactly .) . For such reasons , personally , I hate (1) auto-start installations . (2) auto-detect parts without asking correctness of detection when its conclusion is not verifiable by the installers ( for example (ADSL router modem is not detected correctly even its network card is detected and installation continued with assumption that there is no such a device . ) ( erroneously detection of monitor resolutions and using a default resolution which is not usable due to mismatch to display characteristics of the monitor ) ... ) With respect to experiences gained continuously installing operating systems , my idea about FreeBSD sysinstal is that it is an excellent installation system developed by very conscious persons which they know what to do very well . The points I suggested for improvements are toward to make it easy for the beginners . For a computing system , to satisfy needs of both beginners and expert users is not a very easy task . Making a part easy for a group may make it difficult for other group . Using defaults is not always correct due to hardware detection difficulties . My inclination is toward the beginners as much as possible because this approach will enlarge FreeBSD user group . In reality , design of a user interface is within subject areas of Ergonomy , Human-Computer Interaction , and User Interface Design which there are plenty amount of researches about those subjects , and many scientific journals and books . When I was in University a research assistant was working toward a PhD in Ergonomy by researching user interface software design principles to reduce the human errors during control of a system ( for example , effects of menu depths ) . Thank you very much . Mehmet Erol Sanliturk ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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, every screen, with serial console, with ssh, with screenreader - is easy enough for people who are able to use it after the installation - doesn't need a mouse to be usable FreeBSD isn't Linux/OSX/Windows, FreeBSD is not for users who want eyecandy, FreeBSD is for professinals who want perfectly working systems, who know how to edit .conf-files, which packages the need and so on. (at least I think so) IMHO, the biggest problem with graphical installers is that they just don't work for everyone. For example, my last attempts to install Ubuntu Linux stopped when the installer didn't work with my graphics card or just choosed a mode my TFT didn't support. This was such a bad experience, I didn't wanted to try it anymore. Regards, Neo [GC] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 20:28:55 +0300, Giorgos Keramidas 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 the user. Imagine a bline user. Is GUI user friendly for him? No, because he has zero output on his Braille line. The installer does something and he doesn't even notice. My idea would be to add a short description for each choice (so the illiterate user can make an assumption of what he will get), but default to the SIMPLEST option always. That's the idea of FreeBSD: The installer provides a basic OS that runs, but YOU need to install the applications you want. The philosophy is: If you want it, go get it. It's not that it fills GBs on your hard disk with stuff you'll never touch (as in my case, PC-BSD would do with the whole KDE stuff). FreeBSD installer selection --- Please select the environment where you want to perform the installation (1) Text mode installer This installer runs well on a serial line and is intended for professional users. It runs on every system (desktop and server). (2) Graphical installer (basic) This installer is intended for PCs. It gives help and advices and guides you through the installation. It's recommended for new users. (3) Graphical installer (extended) Works as (2), but gives even more help and advices. Runs on most recent computers. It can be utilized by new users, too. You have 30 seconds to make a selection. If no selection is made, the text mode installer (fail-safe mode) will be launched. Choice ===> _ PF1PF2PF10 Help Language Abort > [...] there is a > timeout so the installer won't get stuck forever in the prompt, and > there is still an option for a plain console-based installation for > everyone who wants to go that way. The plain console shouldn't be the option, it should be the default. The GUI should be the option because it IS optional (read: not required) for real work. -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 17:06:58 +0200, beni 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 functionality (instead of adding it). For example, if you need more time for an installation, require a mouse, or can't use your Braille readout anymore - then it's wrong- Or better: It's useless. > Guys, please, wake up, we don't live in the 70's anymore > ! That's why FreeBSD is not following strange MICROS~1 concepts of how to do several things. :-) > I'm using pc-bsd. Why ? Cause of the easy and nice installer. It's as simple > as that. You value an operating system by how the installer LOOKS like? I'm sure you're kidding. :-) Honestly: People can't be that stupid. Oh wait... okay, I didn't say anything. :-) The point is - what I would have better said instead of the previous two paragraphs - a text mode installer LOOKS more serious. Serious biznis, you know? Servers, and workstations, and operating system. For work to be done. Lots of work. Ask people who work as admins, who keep mailservers running, webservers, application servers. Do they choose the OS by the amount of eye candy in the INSTALLER? I'm sure they don't. > And before anyone says "do it yourself", "get a sponsor" or something down > those lines : if it is all about choice, why not give the people/user the > choice ? Now I don't have any choice : sysinstall or pc-bsd... Or DesktopBSD. :-) > I'm for both : text and graphical :-) As I explained in an earlier post: If the GUI installer is (a) not the only way, (b) not an auto-default, (c) does work well enough even on older hardware and (d) doesn't make things more complicated, I wouldn't have any problem with it, I would even use it! But please note that many users of FreeBSD are scared by the way other GUI driven installers work. Much time is needed to do an installation, and there's more emphasize put on how things look instead of how they work. So I can understand everyone who says: "When FreeBSD gets a crappy installerjust like 'Windows' and some Linusi, then I would look around for another OS that fits my needs." -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 02:18:55 +0200, Erik Trulsson 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 user all the decisions that are impossible to make with a reasonable chance of doing the Right Thing for everyone seems ok too. Solaris has been shipping for quite some time with an installer that can run on serial consoles, an installer that can launch a simple terminal-based session under X11, and an installer that can launch a Java GUI version in all its bloated glory. The decision of which installer to launch is left to the user who sits on the boot console, who is presented with a simple menu like: +---+ | | | Please select installation type (default = 3): _ | | | | 1. Text-only console installation. | | | | 2. Terminal based GUI installation. | | | | 3. Dialog driven GUI installation. | | | +---+ There is also a timeout that launches the user-friendly GUI dialogs after a few seconds. I think this is a reasonable approach to the problem of which installation mode to launch. The default is `user friendly', there is a timeout so the installer won't get stuck forever in the prompt, and there is still an option for a plain console-based installation for everyone who wants to go that way. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
> > > > 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 ramble on > > I'm not sure I understood this correctly... Do you suggest > something like running a (minimalistic) web server from the > machine where FreeBSD is about to be installed, and then > have either a HTTP connection from localhost or from a > distant machine (where someone else can do the install)? > Yes. To both. lynx or maybe opera depending on if it's a console install or X install. Otherwise could be used from remote so the people unfamiliar with this OS (let's think datacenter) can pop in a disk, assign an IP (maybe within the lynx/opera browser), and offer up a password to secure the remote install. I like this idea, but it's my plaything when it comes to actually making a prototype when I decide if I want to move further into it or bail on it. The idea just sounded nice. --TJ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
I didn't say a graphical installer has less functionality. I said it has no more. On Sunday, April 26, 2009, beni 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 >> > >> > wrote: >> >>> software installation CPU/RAM needs), run the dialog(3) interface. Â 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. >> > >> > This discussion is not about Linux or Windows. Â It is about a >> > graphical installer. Â If you are not going to contribute anything >> > useful to the discussion, close your email client. >> >> 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 >> functionality. Concentrate on function and flexibility instead of eye >> candy. And I tend to agree with Polyptron about language. I have several >> friends who wouldn't dream of using a system that's English only. Simply >> because they do not understand it well enough. > > Why should a graphical installer have less functionality ? And what is wrong > with some eye candy ? Guys, please, wake up, we don't live in the 70's anymore > ! I'm using pc-bsd. Why ? Cause of the easy and nice installer. It's as simple > as that. > And before anyone says "do it yourself", "get a sponsor" or something down > those lines : if it is all about choice, why not give the people/user the > choice ? Now I don't have any choice : sysinstall or pc-bsd... > I'm for both : text and graphical :-) > > -- > Beni. > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
El dÃa 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 it. matthias -- Matthias Apitz Manager Technical Support - OCLC GmbH Gruenwalder Weg 28g - 82041 Oberhaching - Germany t +49-89-61308 351 - f +49-89-61308 399 - m +49-170-4527211 e - w http://www.oclc.org/ http://www.UnixArea.de/ People who hate Microsoft Windows use Linux but people who love UNIX use FreeBSD. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 > > > > 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 PC-BSD) if it's important for you. > > > > This discussion is not about Linux or Windows. It is about a > > graphical installer. If you are not going to contribute anything > > useful to the discussion, close your email client. > > 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 > functionality. Concentrate on function and flexibility instead of eye > candy. And I tend to agree with Polyptron about language. I have several > friends who wouldn't dream of using a system that's English only. Simply > because they do not understand it well enough. Why should a graphical installer have less functionality ? And what is wrong with some eye candy ? Guys, please, wake up, we don't live in the 70's anymore ! I'm using pc-bsd. Why ? Cause of the easy and nice installer. It's as simple as that. And before anyone says "do it yourself", "get a sponsor" or something down those lines : if it is all about choice, why not give the people/user the choice ? Now I don't have any choice : sysinstall or pc-bsd... I'm for both : text and graphical :-) -- Beni. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
> 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 that should be added to the installer. If ever it becomes "necessary" for some functionality to have a GUI installer, then let's think about adding GUI mode. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
Glen Barber wrote: On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 7:01 AM, Wojciech Puchar 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 PC-BSD) if it's important for you. This discussion is not about Linux or Windows. It is about a graphical installer. If you are not going to contribute anything useful to the discussion, close your email client. 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 functionality. Concentrate on function and flexibility instead of eye candy. And I tend to agree with Polyptron about language. I have several friends who wouldn't dream of using a system that's English only. Simply because they do not understand it well enough. -- Rolf Nielsen ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Rolf G Nielsen 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 functionality. > Concentrate on function and flexibility instead of eye candy. And I tend to > agree with Polyptron about language. I have several friends who wouldn't > dream of using a system that's English only. Simply because they do not > understand it well enough. > I never said a graphical installer was needed. My problem with this thread (and most others he contributes to) is Wojciech's attitude in this otherwise (mostly)helpful community. "Use something else" makes this entire list look unhelpful and unwilling to hear people's opinions on features others may find useful. > > Rolf Nielsen > -- Glen Barber ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 7:01 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> software installation CPU/RAM needs), run the dialog(3) interface. Â 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. This discussion is not about Linux or Windows. It is about a graphical installer. If you are not going to contribute anything useful to the discussion, close your email client. -- Glen Barber ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 02:18:55 +0200, Erik Trulsson 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.) It has. It makes my P4 2GHz 768MB RAM with ATI 9200 RV250 run slower than my 300MHz P2 256MB RAM, while not being able to init the screen at 1400x1050... :-( > That logic will often do the wrong thing for servers. They are the most > common case where people want to install using a serial console, but > typically do have a (fairly simple) graphical adapter and could run a > graphical installer perfectly well. That does not necessarily mean > that the person doing the install wants to do it. Exactly. The hardware configuration does not neccessarily imply the intentions of the user. > 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. That would be a good approach. AT and USB keyboards need to be taken into mind. Another thing is the mouse. It *may* not be present, but the user may want to use the GUI installer. Then the GUI installer would need to have full keyboard support - a thing that you can rarely see today... > Also keep in mind that there are graphical adapters/screen combinations > where X will not work correctly without first tweaking configuration files. That's the problem of running X in this very limited stage of operations. It cannot do that much as if it was installed and had custom-tweaked config files. > Things have improved greatly here in recent years, but it is still > not perfect. And disimproved, too. :-) > I fail to see what the point of an X-based install would be - other than > pure eye-candy, which does not seem very important for something like an > installer which is used so rarely. A benefit that people often imply is that it attracts more users, because they get scared by the 80x25. Another point would be to select the LANGUAGE of the installer in the first place. Germans get scared by english words! :-) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 17:45:49 -0600, Tim Judd 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 work with the text mode installer indead? [ text mode ] [ graphical mode ] Note that not everybody with sufficient hardware would also want to use the GUI installer. Well... I won't... :-) CPU power is not the only criteria for running a GUI installer. But you already got into detail and took this into mind. > Second (which ties into the first) is the hardware that was probed during > boot-time. If a /dev entry (or even some sysctl) exists for a pci/agp/pci-e > device, it can run a graphical installer. If it finds none of the graphical > adapters, and sees serial ports, enable the dialog(3) as well. Then the problem of how to support these graphical adapters could arise. You know that X has often problems autodetecting stuff correct, even stuff that worked fine with XFree86 doesn't always work with X.org. So problems are not only "too new" things, but "too old" things, too. > I seem to find this very logical and can't (yet) see any flaws with doing > this. sysinstall is built, we'd just need to maintain it and create the > x-based installer. Run it with a minimalist (twm?) startup so we don't > waste time booting. A window manager? Why use a window manager? It's possible to run X without any window manager, and in this case, it makes sense, because there are no windows to be managed. It's only one program running - the installer. Of course, we're just talking about an installer, aren't we? It's not about a full-featured live system where you can use Firefox while doing the install. :-) > 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 ramble on I'm not sure I understood this correctly... Do you suggest something like running a (minimalistic) web server from the machine where FreeBSD is about to be installed, and then have either a HTTP connection from localhost or from a distant machine (where someone else can do the install)? > Again based on the hardware probed (this one being the amount of RAM in the > box, in contrast to the amount of disk space needed to install on disk), > create a in-ram disk as the staging area when you write to disk. The other > idea is to use dump/restore instead of tar files. Well, dump & restore is my preferred method of "cloning" from a "master workstation". But I'm not sure it can be used for custom installation where the amount of what to install may vary, and it is determined by the person who installs... > Last idea is to do similar to what Ubuntu (used to) do. Provide a X-based > installer CD and a console-based installer CD. I'd think that is too much. You'll always want the CD you haven't got at hand at the moment. :-) > I'd be happy to provide feedback; these were brainstorming ideas and would > really like to see progress move toward a more eye-candy installer. Well, then I'd suggest you prove why eye-candy is needed at all in the first place. :-) As Wojciech mentioned in one of his replies, I'd welcome new functionalities - instead of the same functionalities in an "X enclosure" that makes everything slower. :-) For example, if you get the sources from the install disc, sysinstall could provide a step to update them right away, letting you select the update server and then run csup to bring them up to date. Just an idea. One of many possible ideas. :-) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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. Here's my thought process right now, with hopefully ample samples
> to example my angle (that was fun to say).
>
>
> It's based on two principles. First is the CPU class. If it's a 486 or
> 586, run a pure dialog(3) interface. If it's a slow 686 (and the fudge
> factor to define slow is based on Xorg's *recommended* CPU specs + the
> software installation CPU/RAM needs), run the dialog(3) interface. If it's
> a fast 686, default to a X environment.
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.)
>
> Second (which ties into the first) is the hardware that was probed during
> boot-time. If a /dev entry (or even some sysctl) exists for a pci/agp/pci-e
> device, it can run a graphical installer. If it finds none of the graphical
> adapters, and sees serial ports, enable the dialog(3) as well. I feel like
> some pseudo-code might help paint the picture more.
>
>
> text-mode_install = graphic-mode_install = false
> if (CPUCLASS<=586 || CPUSPEED<=(Xorg-suggested-minimums+install
> requirements)) {
> set text-mode_install true
> } else {
> set graphic-mode_install true
> }
> if (found(VGA-graphics) && graphic-mode_install) {
> exec xinstall
> } else {
> # enable console installer
> exec sysinstall
> }
>
>
>
> I seem to find this very logical and can't (yet) see any flaws with doing
> this. sysinstall is built, we'd just need to maintain it and create the
> x-based installer. Run it with a minimalist (twm?) startup so we don't
> waste time booting.
That logic will often do the wrong thing for servers. They are the most
common case where people want to install using a serial console, but
typically do have a (fairly simple) graphical adapter and could run a
graphical installer perfectly well. That does not necessarily mean
that the person doing the install wants to do it.
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.
Also keep in mind that there are graphical adapters/screen combinations
where X will not work correctly without first tweaking configuration files.
Things have improved greatly here in recent years, but it is still
not perfect.
Text mode is still a good deal more compatible with all kinds of weird
hardware.
>
> 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 ramble on
>
>
>
> And also brainstorming now has brought me another idea about installing base
> with the concerns Jordan Hubbard wrote in 2000 mentioned in this thread.
> Again based on the hardware probed (this one being the amount of RAM in the
> box, in contrast to the amount of disk space needed to install on disk),
> create a in-ram disk as the staging area when you write to disk. The other
> idea is to use dump/restore instead of tar files.
>
> It is possible to have a 3GHz machine with 256MB ram as a valid combination,
> but when bin distribution is about 128MB in size, and kernel distribution is
> 128MB in size, and blindly running an X install -- not wise.
>
>
>
> Last idea is to do similar to what Ubuntu (used to) do. Provide a X-based
> installer CD and a console-based installer CD.
>
>
> I'd be happy to provide feedback; these were brainstorming ideas and would
> really like to see progress move toward a more eye-candy installer.
I fail to see what the point of an X-based install would be - other than
pure eye-candy, which does not seem very important for something like an
installer which is used so rarely.
--
Erik Trulsson
ertr1...@student.uu.se
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 samples
to example my angle (that was fun to say).
It's based on two principles. First is the CPU class. If it's a 486 or
586, run a pure dialog(3) interface. If it's a slow 686 (and the fudge
factor to define slow is based on Xorg's *recommended* CPU specs + the
software installation CPU/RAM needs), run the dialog(3) interface. If it's
a fast 686, default to a X environment.
Second (which ties into the first) is the hardware that was probed during
boot-time. If a /dev entry (or even some sysctl) exists for a pci/agp/pci-e
device, it can run a graphical installer. If it finds none of the graphical
adapters, and sees serial ports, enable the dialog(3) as well. I feel like
some pseudo-code might help paint the picture more.
text-mode_install = graphic-mode_install = false
if (CPUCLASS<=586 || CPUSPEED<=(Xorg-suggested-minimums+install
requirements)) {
set text-mode_install true
} else {
set graphic-mode_install true
}
if (found(VGA-graphics) && graphic-mode_install) {
exec xinstall
} else {
# enable console installer
exec sysinstall
}
I seem to find this very logical and can't (yet) see any flaws with doing
this. sysinstall is built, we'd just need to maintain it and create the
x-based installer. Run it with a minimalist (twm?) startup so we don't
waste time booting.
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 ramble on
And also brainstorming now has brought me another idea about installing base
with the concerns Jordan Hubbard wrote in 2000 mentioned in this thread.
Again based on the hardware probed (this one being the amount of RAM in the
box, in contrast to the amount of disk space needed to install on disk),
create a in-ram disk as the staging area when you write to disk. The other
idea is to use dump/restore instead of tar files.
It is possible to have a 3GHz machine with 256MB ram as a valid combination,
but when bin distribution is about 128MB in size, and kernel distribution is
128MB in size, and blindly running an X install -- not wise.
Last idea is to do similar to what Ubuntu (used to) do. Provide a X-based
installer CD and a console-based installer CD.
I'd be happy to provide feedback; these were brainstorming ideas and would
really like to see progress move toward a more eye-candy installer.
Thanks.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 another OS for purely practical reasons. AFAIK OpenBSD isn't GUI oriented. Linux is, and windows So, no, I don't see text-based sysinstall disappear anytime soon. ;-) Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK Systems Engineer OSU Information Technology Department Telecommunications Services Group -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 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 another OS for purely practical reasons. So, no, I don't see text-based sysinstall disappear anytime soon. ;-) > Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK > Systems Engineer > OSU Information Technology Department Telecommunications Services Group -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 this or that application has no keyboard substitute for a given mouse action. One can be running one of the several rather expensive commercial solutions that allow those who are blind to use the OS, but in the case of applications, each one is its own world. If the developer failed to build in a keyboard equivalent for a given mouse action, it is game over. There is no Plan B. Three guesses as to the name of that OS and the first 2 don't count. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK Systems Engineer OSU Information Technology Department Telecommunications Services Group ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 do it in FreeBSD e.g UFS or ZFS or something else in future. Add repositories (Linux) add csup sites (FreeBSD) and so one. that's good ideas - something about FUNCTIONALITY instead of look. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 points out that GUI installer is nonsense. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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. If the simple stuff works, there are less chances for the law of unintended consequences to rule. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK Systems Engineer OSU Information Technology Department Telecommunications Services Group ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 option, you can easily choose betwen e.g ext3 or reiserfs. It will be nice if we can also do it in FreeBSD e.g UFS or ZFS or something else in future. Add repositories (Linux) add csup sites (FreeBSD) and so one. What do you think about that? Regards, Zbigniew ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 12:10:50AM +0200, Paul B. Mahol wrote:
> On 4/23/09, cpghost 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, it will name it just "X". You can
> >> create as many partitions named "X" as you like.
> >>
> >> Then the newfs will fail.
> >>
> >> I experienced this the other day, and have been meaning to file a bug
> >> report about it.
> >
> > Yes, this is a long standing problem. On one or both of {Open,Net}BSD,
>
> That problem is fixed in 8.0 with introducion of gpart(8)
>
> > 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):
Ah, gpart(8), good hint! Not yet familiar with that.
Apparently, it's already in 7.x. I have no spare disk right now to
give it a try. Would it already support 8+ partitions on RELENG_7,
or do we have to wait for 8.0?
> Paul
Thanks,
-cpghost.
--
Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On 4/23/09, cpghost 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, it will name it just "X". You can
>> create as many partitions named "X" as you like.
>>
>> Then the newfs will fail.
>>
>> I experienced this the other day, and have been meaning to file a bug
>> report about it.
>
> Yes, this is a long standing problem. On one or both of {Open,Net}BSD,
That problem is fixed in 8.0 with introducion of gpart(8)
> 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):
>
> The partition table can have up to 8 entries. It contains the
> following
> information:
>
> # The partition identifier is a single letter in the range `a' to
> `h'. By convention, partition `c' is reserved to describe the
> entire disk.
>
> Take away 'b' for swap, and 'c' for the whole disk, you can only
> use 6 partitions per slice (including the root partition) on the
> bootable slice. That's clearly not enough, esp. on big disks, and
> with complex setups. :-(
>
>> Mike
>> --
>> Michael David Crawford
>> m...@prgmr.com
>
> -cpghost.
>
> --
> Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/
> ___
> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
>
--
Paul
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 many partitions named "X" as you like.
>
> Then the newfs will fail.
>
> I experienced this the other day, and have been meaning to file a bug
> report about it.
Yes, this is a long standing problem. On one or both of {Open,Net}BSD,
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):
The partition table can have up to 8 entries. It contains the following
information:
# The partition identifier is a single letter in the range `a' to
`h'. By convention, partition `c' is reserved to describe the
entire disk.
Take away 'b' for swap, and 'c' for the whole disk, you can only
use 6 partitions per slice (including the root partition) on the
bootable slice. That's clearly not enough, esp. on big disks, and
with complex setups. :-(
> Mike
> --
> Michael David Crawford
> m...@prgmr.com
-cpghost.
--
Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 2:52 AM, Polytropon 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 rely on an already running > system. > > Yesterday I was installing a CentOS 5.3 Linux distribution in GUI mode . It detected monitor maximum size correctly ( 1920 x 1440 ) , but set the monitor mode to 1600 x 1200 while display was in 1920 x 1440 without screen border sliders . Click area for Back and Next was the bottom right corner of the screen which they were not visible . I wondered what will be result of install . By changing zoom values of monitor ( Installer was assuming that screen settings are conforming to each other ) I could manage to squeeze 1920 x 1440 screen size into 1600 x 1200 screen size ( setting of factory defaults of monitor did not help ) . Arrangement of monitor settings took longer than installation itself . Ideas that GUI is NOT better than text based installs is VALID . Thank you very much . Mehmet Erol Sanliturk ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 experienced this the other day, and have been meaning to file a bug report about it. Mike -- Michael David Crawford m...@prgmr.com prgmr.com - We Don't Assume You Are Stupid. Xen-Powered Virtual Private Servers: http://prgmr.com/xen ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
Polytropon wrote: > On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 10:00:24 +0300, Manolis Kiagias 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: >> >> http://ivoras.sharanet.org/blog/tree/2009-02-19.what-happened-to-finstall.html >> > > As an option, yes; as a replacement... uhm, no, better not... > > > > >> The problem here is that sysinstall *does* allow you to go back and redo >> some steps, but then fails miserably and mysteriously >> [...] >> ...it does allow you to go back in a sort of way - but then fails many >> times to continue normally. >> > > I don't deny that fact that this observation is possible, but I > never found such a behaviour. Could you provide an example how > to create a situation where sysinstall fails as you mentioned it? > (It's a completely honest question.) > An example: pressing cancel on any dialog will almost certainly get you somewhere where you cannot continue or restart successfully. The label editor will not allow me to create any partitions other than the standard ones, as it keeps asking for mount points. You can select "Exit this menu (returning to previous one)" (I think cancel too) in the distributions list without making any selection at all, and it still goes on and install (what?). Pressing CTRL+C at most parts of sysinstall will give you a menu to abort or restart the installation program. On restart, most of the times it will fail creating (slices or partitions) or formating filesystems. These are just a few problems I remember now. Granted, if you do always follow the same ritual (as I do mostly) it works and I can simply ignore it, but others hate it... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 10:00:24 +0300, Manolis Kiagias 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: > > http://ivoras.sharanet.org/blog/tree/2009-02-19.what-happened-to-finstall.html As an option, yes; as a replacement... uhm, no, better not... > The problem here is that sysinstall *does* allow you to go back and redo > some steps, but then fails miserably and mysteriously > [...] > ...it does allow you to go back in a sort of way - but then fails many > times to continue normally. I don't deny that fact that this observation is possible, but I never found such a behaviour. Could you provide an example how to create a situation where sysinstall fails as you mentioned it? (It's a completely honest question.) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 06:43:32 +0100, Matthew Seaman 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 changes -- and particularly not any operations > that take appreciable lengths of time like creating filesystems or > downloading voluminous install sets. Exactly, that would be my point, too: FIRST do the interaction, do ALL the interaction and do it "in one chunk". THEN start installing everything that's needed by the choices done. This would include additional packages required by certain services. As an addition, I could imagine a combination of the linear and the hierarchical settings access method. I may draw a silly picture: FreeBSD installerNTP settings10/28 -- Enable NTP? [x] Yes [ ] No NTP server: [ntpthing.bla.dings.org ] Some setting: [oh don't know ] Other setting: [ ] Choice A[x] Choice B[ ] Choice C -- F1 | F2 | F3 | F4 | F10 Help | Menu | Prev: Network (9/28) | Next: Kernel (11/28) | Cancel And yes, I know emplying the function keys can be a problem, but I like them. :-) But I think you get the idea. -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
Polytropon wrote: > On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:59:53 +0300, Manolis Kiagias 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 few annoyances >> with sysinstall. And of course, having a GUI installer as an additional >> option is also very welcome. >> > > No problem, as long as (a) it isn't default (read: too complicated > to switch it off of not needed) and (b) doesn't make things more > complicated. > 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: http://ivoras.sharanet.org/blog/tree/2009-02-19.what-happened-to-finstall.html >> - No real 'back' functionality. Can't fix most mistakes, need to redo >> the install >> > > Hmmm... I think this is where the user learns "first think, then do" > on a good basis. > > > The problem here is that sysinstall *does* allow you to go back and redo some steps, but then fails miserably and mysteriously > > >> Personally, I would like a text installer using a previous/next approach >> that would give me options like: >> > > Forgive me my ignorance, but personally, I completely DISLIKE this > linear approach. Instead of > > A ---> B ---> C ---> D ---> E ---> Foops, forgot something > E <--- no, not here >D <--- not here, too > C <---ah, here it was, okay, got it > C ---> D ---> E ---> F ---> Finish > The moving back approach as I see it is not intended as an excuse to leave your brain turned off. And it doesn't even have to move back all steps - one would be enough for the occasional wrong key-press. > A hierarchy would be better. > > Options: > A This and that > B Some other stuff > C More stuff > D Even more stuff > E Some settings > F Several other settings > DoneCommit > > So one could first select > A This and that > then, knowing that C - E are not interesting for him, address > F Several other settings > directly, make some choices, and then, maybe go back to > A This and that > and do some more tasks, and finally select > DoneCommit > to do the install. > > I have no problem with this strategy, but... > This is what sysinstall already provides. In a modern way, it allows > to "go back" to any setting that has already been done and change it, > and the user is not limited in doing choices in a pre-defined order. > ...it does allow you to go back in a sort of way - but then fails many times to continue normally. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 17:07:54 -1000, Al Plant 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 GUI installer just runs on a narrow subsets of up-to-date GPUs, there are major problems. Especially when a server has no GPU at all. 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 rely on an already running system. Good ways to go (for those who want it this way) are PC-BSD, DesktopBSD and FreeSBIE. > I find it fast and efficient the way it is. Which makes it modern, in my opinion. But hey, I'm old and old-fashioned anyway. :-) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:59:53 +0300, Manolis Kiagias 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 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 few annoyances > with sysinstall. And of course, having a GUI installer as an additional > option is also very welcome. No problem, as long as (a) it isn't default (read: too complicated to switch it off of not needed) and (b) doesn't make things more complicated. It's nice you mentioned some problems (invitations for further development) of sysinstall. Lemme see if I can add something to it: > Some of the current problems with sysinstall IMHO: > > - Confusing set of options - Beginners tend to go in circles inside the > installer > - No real 'back' functionality. Can't fix most mistakes, need to redo > the install Hmmm... I think this is where the user learns "first think, then do" on a good basis. > - Does not make the difference between base system and packages obvious. Yes, especially when adding functionalities like "Linux compatibility", the installer installs some additional packages at this given moment. I'd prefer an installer which acts in two stages: Stage 1: Make all the settings; this would maybe include the option of having a "back" button, or much better: Instead of a linear structure, a hierarchical structure with direct access (as it is now) is much better - in this case, you don't need a "back" button. Stage 2: Download (and install) the system and the packages that are required by the settings made in stage 1. > Personally, I would like a text installer using a previous/next approach > that would give me options like: Forgive me my ignorance, but personally, I completely DISLIKE this linear approach. Instead of A ---> B ---> C ---> D ---> E ---> Foops, forgot something E <--- no, not here D <--- not here, too C <---ah, here it was, okay, got it C ---> D ---> E ---> F ---> Finish A hierarchy would be better. Options: A This and that B Some other stuff C More stuff D Even more stuff E Some settings F Several other settings DoneCommit So one could first select A This and that then, knowing that C - E are not interesting for him, address F Several other settings directly, make some choices, and then, maybe go back to A This and that and do some more tasks, and finally select DoneCommit to do the install. This is what sysinstall already provides. In a modern way, it allows to "go back" to any setting that has already been done and change it, and the user is not limited in doing choices in a pre-defined order. -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 23:16:43 +0200 (CEST), Wojciech Puchar 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 *limiting* the actions you can do with it. Simply consider what will happen if you try to use a GUI installer via a serial console (and this is a common task in datacenters). > it doesn't make sense. Exactly. More graphics != better. And surely not "modern". -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 12:27:39 -0700, Fritz 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 actions: It does not only install the operating systen, it furthermore helps installaing applications and configuring the system, its services, network settings, security and so on. It can be used from a serial console, from the text mode, and from an X terminal. It's very straight forward. For maximum easiness of operations, it's controlled via the keyboard. As I mentioned, this can be a local keyboard, or one of a serial terminal (a real terminal in hardware or a connected terminal emulator). At the moment, this modern installer is available in the english language, which is the main communications language of the FreeBSD operating system. English language is a mandatory language for any serious IT bizniz, so it's no problem at all. If you think the FreeBSD installer lacks a specific functionality, then feel free to report to the mailing list or contact the FreeBSD developers. > I looked at the list of projects and didn't see it there ... did > I miss something? Obviously. :-) -- Polytropon >From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD 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 services - Help and that would allow someone to go back and forth between the pages So long as it maintains two other really useful features of the existing sysinstall: * scriptable installs -- ie. being able to preload a file containing answers to any or all installation choices. Ideally you should be able to PXE boot the installer over a network, whence it runs sysinstall automatically to build a system without further operator intervention. * You answer all of the questions first, and only then does the installer commit any irreversible changes -- and particularly not any operations that take appreciable lengths of time like creating filesystems or downloading voluminous install sets. The ability to whiz through sysinstall, set everything up and hit 'go', then deal with something else while the machine is chuntering away to itself is a real godsend. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 for FreeBSD? I looked at the list of projects and didn't see it there ... did I miss something? If you're asking for an installer which requires bitmapped graphics and won't work over a serial terminal or the like, well, I hope the answer is never. Some people have tried before and/or might still be working on a replacement, but thus far, nobody has written one which is widely regarded as better than sysinstall. You might find this interesting to read: http://people.freebsd.org/~jkh/package-and-install.txt Regards, -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" Aloha, I have used the text base Sysinstall since 2.* FreeBSD. It is extremely flexible especially with ports. Keeps your system lean of code. Gui installs have a tendency to hide things you need to tweak or alter to suit a specific need. I find it fast and efficient the way it is. Thanks to our faithful coders for all their work. ~Al Plant - Honolulu, Hawaii - Phone: 808-284-2740 + http://hawaiidakine.com + http://freebsdinfo.org + + http://aloha50.net - Supporting - FreeBSD 6.* - 7.* - 8.* + < email: n...@hdk5.net > "All that's really worth doing is what we do for others."- Lewis Carrol ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 installation is > implied by the reactions, not by the original poster. Personally I > wouldn't mind if an additional install cd is available with a nice > graphical interface. As long as the original, text mode / sysinstall > is available as _default_, I dont't care if there is a > ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ISO-IMAGES-i386/7.1/7.1-RELEASE-GUI-i386-disc1.iso > sponsored by > Fritz Kolberg [ and yes, he insist on paying for something which is > free ] > > Jeroen > > 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 few annoyances with sysinstall. And of course, having a GUI installer as an additional option is also very welcome. Some of the current problems with sysinstall IMHO: - Confusing set of options - Beginners tend to go in circles inside the installer - No real 'back' functionality. Can't fix most mistakes, need to redo the install - Does not make the difference between base system and packages obvious. - Tries to do too much for a single program (install, configure, install packages, fdisk, label, network you name it) but many of these choices lack essential functionality or behave strangely. (i.e. the label editor will not allow you to create an extra partition without giving a mount point) 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 services - Help and that would allow someone to go back and forth between the pages For myself I don't really mind, as I always do the same install (Standard, Custom Distribution, Select everything but X, ports, local and so on) but it would be really nice if people just starting out don't get intimidated by the installer. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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: 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? > > If you're asking for an installer which requires bitmapped graphics > and won't work over a serial terminal or the like, well, I hope the > answer is never. Some people have tried before and/or might still be > working on a replacement, but thus far, nobody has written one which > is widely regarded as better than sysinstall. > > You might find this interesting to read: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~jkh/package-and-install.txt > Very good article - not surprising, considering the author. Anyone considering working on the installer or the package system should read it carefully as a first step. jerry > Regards, > -- > -Chuck > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 by the reactions, not by the original poster. Personally I wouldn't mind if an additional install cd is available with a nice graphical interface. As long as the original, text mode / sysinstall is available as _default_, I dont't care if there is a ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ISO-IMAGES-i386/7.1/7.1-RELEASE-GUI-i386-disc1.iso sponsored by Fritz Kolberg [ and yes, he insist on paying for something which is free ] Jeroen Wojciech Puchar schreef: 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 you're used to it. i don't understand WHY something has to be better just because it's working in graphics mode. it doesn't make sense. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
-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. > 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 you're used to it. i don't understand WHY something has to be better just because it's working in graphics mode. it doesn't make sense. 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 installer. I'm a function before form person, so pretty GUI's don't really impress me much. Make it detect my hardware CORRECTLY and install the right stuff fairly quickly and I'm happy! "This email is intended to be reviewed by only the intended recipient and may contain information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, disclosure or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system." ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 FreeBSD Project with FreeBSD Mall in his mind. The latter, of course, has subscriptions available for their CD/DVD sets. Dear OP: They're not the same organization, though to the best of my knowledge, they're on quite good terms with each other. -- --Jon Radel j...@radel.com smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
RE: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 cool graphics is important - why using FreeBSD at all? there are lot of other products both free and commercial that concentrates on it. not only installer - everything else too :) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 you're used to it. i don't understand WHY something has to be better just because it's working in graphics mode. it doesn't make sense. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 ... did I miss something? Thanks Fritz Kolberg Phoenix, AZ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 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? If you're asking for an installer which requires bitmapped graphics and won't work over a serial terminal or the like, well, I hope the answer is never. Some people have tried before and/or might still be working on a replacement, but thus far, nobody has written one which is widely regarded 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 you're used to it. -- Adam Vandemore Systems Administrator IMED Mobility (605) 498-1610 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
In response to Fritz : > > 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 brought up time and again. The general consensus is that if you need a fancy installer, use something like PC-BSD. There are a lot of advantages to FreeBSD's text installer ... for one, it works over a serial console. Any new installer would have to keep those advantages. It's also easier to maintain than a graphical installer. The general consensus every time this question comes up is that it could be improved, but it's currently "good enough" and there are other improvements that people think are more important. With a limited number of developer hours available, something gets back-burnered. The idea of a better installer has yet to meet with any resistance, though. It's just a lack of available time, so if you've got time and you're volunteering, I say go for it! -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
-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 something? > > Thanks > > Fritz Kolberg > > Phoenix, AZ Hi Fritz, The finstall project aimed to do that, but it appears that the project is on hold at the moment: http://ivoras.sharanet.org/blog/tree/2009-02-19.what-happened-to-finstall.html Regards, Greg - -- Greg Larkin http://www.FreeBSD.org/ - The Power To Serve http://www.sourcehosting.net/ - Ready. Set. Code. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJ73030sRouByUApARAqfBAKCn7rnMJsuLmOrWRYDQeSd+73NZAQCghBhg 5H54QXXqwoKFvy7aS7dcNPw= =/yhe -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 looked at the list of projects and didn't see it there ... did I miss something? If you're asking for an installer which requires bitmapped graphics and won't work over a serial terminal or the like, well, I hope the answer is never. Some people have tried before and/or might still be working on a replacement, but thus far, nobody has written one which is widely regarded as better than sysinstall. You might find this interesting to read: http://people.freebsd.org/~jkh/package-and-install.txt Regards, -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer?
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 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
