From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3173 invoked from network); 14 Jan 2004 23:35:26 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (128.193.0.39) by eagle.gentoo.oregonstate.edu with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP; 14 Jan 2004 23:35:26 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([128.193.0.34] helo=eagle.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AguXm-0005cU-FX for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 23:35:26 +0000 Received: (qmail 24140 invoked by uid 50004); 14 Jan 2004 23:35:26 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 4594 invoked from network); 14 Jan 2004 23:35:26 +0000 Message-ID: <001801c3daf7$039109c0$d30111ac@spider> From: "Brian Dwornick" To: "Patrick Lauer" Cc: References: <4005682C.2070708@stevesworld.hopto.org> <001101c3dae2$a8596200$d30111ac@spider> <1074118134.10480.13.camel@localhost> Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 18:34:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Installer For Gentoo X-Archives-Salt: a4bcb6bb-a197-47b7-a6f7-22388d1979c5 X-Archives-Hash: 1ea72bfefa2b69a5d724d37ef9cf844a ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick Lauer" > On Wed, 2004-01-14 at 22:09, Brian Dwornick wrote: > > There are two very different reasons that I can see for making an installer. > > One is to make it easier to install gentoo for people that are not > > comfortable with linux. This in my opinion would be a bad move as gentoo > > isn't aimed to be the first linux distribution someone uses. > I disagree. Teaching people something because it might be easier in the > beginning is not always the best strategy. I do agree that gentoo is good for people that want to learn. Wanting to learn and a pretty GUI are not on the same path. I am more trying to make a point that the people that would truely benifit from an installer are sysadmins that are trying to mass load and do not want to resort to disk imaging. While a pretty GUI is good for a first time linux user, if they really want to learn, they should use the install guide and go at it the old fashoned way. > > Just look at all the people that need a mouse and a pretty icon to click > at. How did they work with text-based editors a few years ago? > Why can't the secretary that used DOS 3.3 to copy files use the Dos-box > in Windows? > > I've observed that those people that are interested in learning (as > opposed to those that want to get their work done) can benefit a lot > from gentoo, and the others don't care (if there is a problem, _you_ > better fix it), so you can't loose (I hope) > > So, from my point of view, Gentoo is good since it teaches those that > want to learn and makes life easier for me if I have to "repair" a > broken system. > > > The seconds > > reason would be to make it easier to install in a corporate enviroment > > (server farms, multiple offices, etc.) With this in mind, I believe an > > "installer" should be implemented as a text based script, not a pretty GUI. > I'm more for a config-file driven thingy with different frontends (nice > GUI with text fallback or something like that), but someone has to > implement it ... > > > It should read a config file made by whoever is doing the install that has > > many default configs in it and maybe prompt for the uses of the machine. > > IE: > If you could save / restore a config file you could easily clone a setup > onto different hardware, and if you had automatic processor detection you > could clone the setup _and_ optimise at the same time! :-) > > > The following configs have been detected please choose one: > > [0] Prompt for config > > [1] Desktop (KDE) > > [2] Laptop (KDE) > > [3] Email/Web/DNS Server (No X) > > [4] Rendering Farm > > ? 2 > Yes, that should be nice. Maybe a two- or three-layer menu, but > nothing as horrible as dselect, please. > > > What stage would you like to start from? > > [1] > > [2] > > [3] > > ... > > At this point the installer could make choices that would produce the > > optimal system but without the system admin having to sit and type the same > > things over and over. The make.conf could be generated by using /proc and > > the settings from the loaded config. > You expect a lot of magic. I tend to dislike automatic detection of hardware > since it can never work on all available systems. But if it worked very > well (99,999% ;-) ) it'd be really nice to have. > Still, I'd like to have full manual control, e.g. disable automagic > detection, force-load this module, ... > > > Basically, distributions like Redhat make many decisions for you. I would > > hate to see an installer that took choices from the users hands, as, gentoo > > seems to be about choice. > I agree. > > > My two cents, > Euro or dollar? which dollar? > > Patrick > -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list