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