Re: Towards a graphical installer?
Hello, Mathieu Othacehe skribis: > I think switching to a DE based installer could: > > * Allow the user to browse for some questions or contact #guix while in > the installation process. > > * Bring better control of network connection, with a dedicated tool such > as NetworkManager applet. I think the Connman-based option we currently have is pretty good (modulo the WiFi bug we had ;-)) and has the advantage of being well integrated, no? > * Make easier to add accessibility support to the installer. Really? Text-based interfaces tend to lend themselves well to accessibility support, I think, with things like BRLTTY. I would think that using a graphical DE is more challenging because one has to know how to navigate between windows, how to query the currently-focused window, etc., which requires a screen reader like Orca or similar, which is not really a panacea. I also wonder whether the extra hundreds of megabytes for “just” running a terminal under X11 are warranted. It would be a different story if the installer itself were graphical. But at any rate, I think closure size is an issue. Thoughts? Ludo’.
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
Mathieu Othacehe writes: > A way to move forward with the installer could be to propose an ISO > image starting a desktop-environment by default. The attached patch > modifies the installation image so that it starts a GNOME session. The > installer is then automatically started, inside a gnome-terminal. > > The resulting ISO image is bigger: 3.9G without compression and 1.7G > with compression. > > Now, I'm not sure this is something we want to merge as-is. Maybe, it's > time to port the installer to a GTK3 application, or a Web > application. As we already have something working, porting (gnu > installer) to a new graphical backend, could be not so hard. I haven't had time to try this out yet, but it sounds very exciting! Thanks, Chris signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
Hello Florian, > I suppose keyboard input method (IME) support is a reason why someone > might wish to use an Xorg-based installer. Are there other reasons? > What are the reasons for a real desktop environment; is the goal to > offer a live image? Previously I would have thought a virtual console > is more likely to work everywhere, but kmscon has the same > requirements as Xorg and without kmscon we’d lose i18n. I think switching to a DE based installer could: * Allow the user to browse for some questions or contact #guix while in the installation process. * Bring better control of network connection, with a dedicated tool such as NetworkManager applet. * Make easier to add accessibility support to the installer. Regarding i18n, the current mechanism would indeed be broken. However, switching to setxkbmap or any GNOME API should not be too hard. Thanks, Mathieu
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
Hello Tobias and Jonathan, > Are you, for example, able to connect to a Wi-Fi network the Gnome way (not > using the installer), without a Gnome authentication dialogue popping up that > doesn't understand the notion of ‘no password’? I had to open a terminal and > ‘passwd’ myself out of that to continue. No, I kept connman as the installer network-manager. > Last time I brought this up someone mentioned using Calamares[0]. Not that I > think that's a good idea, but it's another data point for discussion :-p My main concern with Calamares, Anaconda & friends is that we will inevitably have to write some Python/C++ to adapt it to Guix System installation. Now that we have Guile code covering the whole installation and associated automated tests, I would prefer not to use those external tools. > As much as I dislike Gnome, I think we should first try to use the (most > likely) default desktop during the installation, and I do think that's > currently Gnome. I agree that even though GNOME is heavy and hard to configure, its also probably to most popular DE. To adapt the current installer to GNOME, we would need to: * Switch from connman to NetworkManager. * Add DBus bindings to control NetworkManager. * Use 'setxkbmap' or a GNOME API to handle keyboard layout switching. * Open the info page somewhere else than on TTY2, maybe in a Web-browser. Thanks, Mathieu
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 09:20:36AM +0200, Mathieu Othacehe wrote: > I think switching to a DE based installer could Every reason you list is a good reason. > * Allow the user to browse for some questions or contact #guix while in > the installation process. Hmm what I don’t like about heavyweight live images is that there are so many possibilities and they make so many decisions on what is the default. Currently I can guix install the programs I actually want. Oh well. Maybe not preinstall all those apps, be it an IRC client, a Web browser, GNUnet or whatever we like, but instead have the user choose to install them? Regards, Florian
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
dftxbs3e writes: > On 5/12/20 9:09 AM, Pierre Neidhardt wrote: >> Errr... Sorry, I was distracted yesterday, the NLNet grant is actually >> for a graphical _package manager_, not an installer! :p >> >> That said, I'm interested in helping with it too! :) >> > > Really?! We have that?? Wonderful!! That would be the YaST thing I was > talking about!! Not yet, but hopefully soon :) To clarify, what are you expecting from a "YaST thing"? -- Pierre Neidhardt https://ambrevar.xyz/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
On 5/12/20 9:09 AM, Pierre Neidhardt wrote: > Errr... Sorry, I was distracted yesterday, the NLNet grant is actually > for a graphical _package manager_, not an installer! :p > > That said, I'm interested in helping with it too! :) > Really?! We have that?? Wonderful!! That would be the YaST thing I was talking about!! signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
On AP 22.02.1399 17:57, Mathieu Othacehe wrote: Hello, A way to move forward with the installer could be to propose an ISO image starting a desktop-environment by default. The attached patch modifies the installation image so that it starts a GNOME session. The installer is then automatically started, inside a gnome-terminal. The resulting ISO image is bigger: 3.9G without compression and 1.7G with compression. Now, I'm not sure this is something we want to merge as-is. Maybe, it's time to port the installer to a GTK3 application, or a Web application. As we already have something working, porting (gnu installer) to a new graphical backend, could be not so hard. I don't think I'll have the bandwidth to do this anytime soon, but is someone is interested, I'm willing to help/review :). Thanks, Mathieu I think a Qt-Based application could be a good idea as an installer. Also there is an installer `calamares` developed by Qt. It's plugin based and we can develop/customize GUIX specific plugins of `calamares`. So we can have a GUI Installer more faster. Currently the `calamares` is used by many other distros like `Lubuntu` and `Manjaro`. https://calamares.io/about/ https://calamares.io/calamares-2.0-is-out/ Also we can choose `LXQt` as the default DE for installation. So we can have a smaller ISO image with a lightweight and capable DE.
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
Pierre Neidhardt writes: > Errr... Sorry, I was distracted yesterday, the NLNet grant is actually > for a graphical _package manager_, not an installer! :p > > That said, I'm interested in helping with it too! :) Still awesome :) I'm looking forward to seeing your work evolve! :) - Chris
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
On 5/12/20 8:10 AM, dftxbs3e wrote: > > I was thinking that designing a good TUI installer would be sufficient, > I find the latest Subiquity Ubuntu installer very beautiful and great! > > Have a look: https://invidio.us/watch?v=Glyj4BjAhME > > Git: https://github.com/CanonicalLtd/subiquity > > Do you think there's really a point in doing GUI? > > Also, if GUI, is there a way to do that with more minimalism while > getting the desired features? > Sorry for the second mail but I have another thought : I am thinking since a while that GNU Guix is the perfect platform to write something like OpenSUSE's YaST, with a good base and many frontends such as TUI, GUI, web. It would be awesome. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
On 5/11/20 3:27 PM, Mathieu Othacehe wrote: > > Hello, > > A way to move forward with the installer could be to propose an ISO > image starting a desktop-environment by default. The attached patch > modifies the installation image so that it starts a GNOME session. The > installer is then automatically started, inside a gnome-terminal. > > The resulting ISO image is bigger: 3.9G without compression and 1.7G > with compression. > > Now, I'm not sure this is something we want to merge as-is. Maybe, it's > time to port the installer to a GTK3 application, or a Web > application. As we already have something working, porting (gnu > installer) to a new graphical backend, could be not so hard. > > I don't think I'll have the bandwidth to do this anytime soon, but is > someone is interested, I'm willing to help/review :). > > Thanks, > > Mathieu > I was thinking that designing a good TUI installer would be sufficient, I find the latest Subiquity Ubuntu installer very beautiful and great! Have a look: https://invidio.us/watch?v=Glyj4BjAhME Git: https://github.com/CanonicalLtd/subiquity Do you think there's really a point in doing GUI? Also, if GUI, is there a way to do that with more minimalism while getting the desired features? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
raingloom writes: > Can the TUI installer be used with a screen reader? AFAIK it can't but > I'd love to be proven wrong. I was just thinking about accessibility in Guix recently. I was wondering something similar. > Anyway, there are also other accessibility options that are useful. High > contrast, magnifier, sticky keys, etc. GNOME provides these. > Even if you aren't blind or disabled in general, you might just have to > install an operating system without a working screen one day. I would love to think more about accessibility in other parts of the Guix System, too. I thought I found a terminal screen reader recently but I can't remember where it was. - John
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
On Mon, 11 May 2020 18:29:09 +0200 "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" wrote: > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 03:27:29PM +0200, Mathieu Othacehe wrote: > > A way to move forward with the installer could be to propose an ISO > > image starting a desktop-environment by default. […] > > Thank you for investigating. > > I suppose keyboard input method (IME) support is a reason why someone > might wish to use an Xorg-based installer. Are there other reasons? > What are the reasons for a real desktop environment; is the goal to > offer a live image? Previously I would have thought a virtual console > is more likely to work everywhere, but kmscon has the same > requirements as Xorg and without kmscon we’d lose i18n. > > Regards, > Florian > Can the TUI installer be used with a screen reader? AFAIK it can't but I'd love to be proven wrong. Anyway, there are also other accessibility options that are useful. High contrast, magnifier, sticky keys, etc. GNOME provides these. Even if you aren't blind or disabled in general, you might just have to install an operating system without a working screen one day.
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
Pierre Neidhardt writes: > Nice! > > I'm planning to work on a probably-GTK graphical installer as part of > the NLNet grant I've received in the coming month. Let's keep in touch! > > Let's get started with a simple question: guile-gi or g-golf? This is awesome!
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 09:50:57PM +0200, Pierre Neidhardt wrote: > I'm planning to work on a probably-GTK graphical installer as part of > the NLNet grant I've received in the coming month. Let's keep in touch! Congratulations! signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
Nice! I'm planning to work on a probably-GTK graphical installer as part of the NLNet grant I've received in the coming month. Let's keep in touch! Let's get started with a simple question: guile-gi or g-golf? -- Pierre Neidhardt https://ambrevar.xyz/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 03:27:29PM +0200, Mathieu Othacehe wrote: > A way to move forward with the installer could be to propose an ISO > image starting a desktop-environment by default. […] Thank you for investigating. I suppose keyboard input method (IME) support is a reason why someone might wish to use an Xorg-based installer. Are there other reasons? What are the reasons for a real desktop environment; is the goal to offer a live image? Previously I would have thought a virtual console is more likely to work everywhere, but kmscon has the same requirements as Xorg and without kmscon we’d lose i18n. Regards, Florian
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
Mathieu, Jonathan, A truly graphical installer would be glorious. Exploring it was what led to the quick & dirty zisofs patch. Like you I was able to get a surprisingly working Gnome desktop, but it was very rough at the edges. (However my compressed images were closer to 1.4 GiB than your 1.7 which might explain that; cut out things like GDM ). Are you, for example, able to connect to a Wi-Fi network the Gnome way (not using the installer), without a Gnome authentication dialogue popping up that doesn't understand the notion of ‘no password’? I had to open a terminal and ‘passwd’ myself out of that to continue. I ran into so many paper cuts like this I burnt out due to Gnome being, you know, Gnome. Mathieu Othacehe 写道： Now, I'm not sure this is something we want to merge as-is. Maybe, it's time to port the installer to a GTK3 application, or a Web application. As we already have something working, porting (gnu installer) to a new graphical backend, could be not so hard. Last time I brought this up someone mentioned using Calamares[0]. Not that I think that's a good idea, but it's another data point for discussion :-p Jonathan Brielmaier 写道： Nice initiative! Maybe it would be an idea to use XFCE instead of GNOME as it's tend to be a little smaller. And maybe more stable as they don't have that many releases... As much as I dislike Gnome, I think we should first try to use the (most likely) default desktop during the installation, and I do think that's currently Gnome. Not at all costs of course. Size. Stability. Sanity. Kind regards, T G-R [0]: https://calamares.io/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Towards a graphical installer?
On 11/05/2020 15:27, Mathieu Othacehe wrote: > A way to move forward with the installer could be to propose an ISO > image starting a desktop-environment by default. The attached patch > modifies the installation image so that it starts a GNOME session. The > installer is then automatically started, inside a gnome-terminal. > > The resulting ISO image is bigger: 3.9G without compression and 1.7G > with compression. Nice initiative! Maybe it would be an idea to use XFCE instead of GNOME as it's tend to be a little smaller. And maybe more stable as they don't have that many releases...
