From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev-return-5908-arch-gentoo-dev=gentoo.org@gentoo.org>
Received: (qmail 21519 invoked by uid 1002); 21 Aug 2003 13:33:31 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev-unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev-subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Received: (qmail 16408 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2003 13:33:31 -0000
From: Luke-Jr <luke-jr@gentoo.org>
Organization: Gentoo Linux
To: Stewart Honsberger <blkdeath@gentoo.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 13:33:22 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.5.2
Cc: foser <foser@foser.dyn.warande.net>, gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
References: <20030819112719.3ff4da41.svyatogor@gentoo.org> <200308200116.33551.luke-jr@gentoo.org> <3F445A5D.4080301@gentoo.org>
In-Reply-To: <3F445A5D.4080301@gentoo.org>
GPG-Public-Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xD53E9583
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="shift_jis"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Description: clearsigned data
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200308211333.29393.luke-jr@gentoo.org>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Replacing fdisk with cfdisk in
X-Archives-Salt: f269a2a9-fb9f-4efe-a293-1229de6545c5
X-Archives-Hash: 3093e7f14f93f3f39f9a3abf2f1df13b

=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thursday 21 August 2003 05:36 am, Stewart Honsberger wrote:
> Gentoo's installation is great because it is simple, elegant, and
> powerful. It's not cluttered with every "user-friendly" (read: attempt
> at idiot-proof) tool known to man.

No, but tools should be obvious to the user when they can be without losing=
=20
any functionality. Nano, for example, makes itself quite obvious how to use=
=20
and is not, AFAIK, explained anywhere in the manual. cfdisk is obvious in t=
he=20
same way. As far as the manual goes, neither nano nor cfdisk lack any neede=
d=20
functionality.

> Gentoo sets a bar at a certain height, and expects users to acheive that
> height in order to get their system off the ground. How many times are
> we going to lower the bar? As with every "user-friendly" system,
> eventually along comes a better idiot.

InGen itself is designed to make even someone who has never used a computer=
=20
before able to install Gentoo. There could then be a problem with having=20
idiots using Gentoo, but I'm sure something can be found to keep them=20
seperate from "real" users.

> fdisk is a simple, standard, powerful partition table editor. I've used
> Linux's fdisk to repair botched tables more times than I can count.
> Instructions for use can be very simple.

Instructions for fdisk can be simple, as opposed to not really needing=20
instructions for cfdisk at all... I'm not saying exclude fdisk (it can't be=
=20
that big), but there's no reason to use it by default (eg in the manual).

> The last patch of the slope is the Vi(M) discussion. "Vi is hard" seems
> like a bit of a cop-out to me. Vi can be summed-up in half a dozen lines;
>
> vi <filename> - Load file for editing
> /<keyword>  - search
>
> :w - Write file to disk
> :q - Quit
>
> Commands can be combined, eg; :wq - Write file to disk and Quit
>
> Five lines and users have all the knowledge they need to create / edit
> their base system files. A few more short lines and you can explain
> (global) search/replace to give them more advanced functionality.

I don't see anything in those *4* lines explaining how to enter data (eg 'i=
'=20
or 'a'), but like fdisk, vi would require explaining how to use it whereas=
=20
nano is obvious, so it should be includes, but not in the manual.

> I've been seeing a lot of talk, even since the day I first wandered into
> Gentoo's user support areas (IRC, forums, mailing lists) about
> 'graphical installation front-ends', install scripts, etc.
>
> Gentoo has always been a great tool for getting users accustomed to
> their system from the inside out. Do we want to remain that way, or do
> we want to become "Just Another (Half-Assed) User-Friendly Linux
> Distro"? The likes of RedHat, Mandrake, and SuSE have fully graphical
> installation utilities that make the Windows install look complicated;
> five clicks and an hour later you're staring at your gorgeous KDE
> desktop. If we're going to aim towards user-friendlines on installation,
> we're already several years behind right out of the starting gate. Can
> we possibly compete with that? (Not to mention their respective
> corporate funding)

Of course we can. Gentoo can be for everyone at the same time. There is no=
=20
reason we need to get rid of the manual/stages to include a GUI. InGen help=
s=20
with this by making the GUI too simple for most "real" users to like,=20
therefore most (all?) current users will continue to use the manual=20
installation, as well as new experienced users.

> I'm of the opinion that we have to set barriers; lines in the sand, if
> you will. "This is how friendly we will become" and stick to those
> boundaries. This would, of course, also help with the consistency issues
> that are raised weekly on this list. ;>

I agree we may need to keep the "idiot" and "real user" communities seperat=
e,=20
but there's no reason both cannot exist.
=2D --=20
Luke-Jr
Developer, Gentoo Linux
http://www.gentoo.org/
=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/RMooZl/BHdU+lYMRAo/MAJ9haBE3CrBzxrU9njN7ImY5nc4+PgCeOvsx
g+YL+de5LOyPYJ6x5Tn47nA=3D
=3DoYSa
=2D----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list