On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Tony Theodore <to...@logyst.com> wrote: >>>> > Perhaps the way to go is a common table of target defaults eg >>>> > /usr/src/usr.sbin/sysinstall/install.cfg >>>> > Which could then be edited by all of >>>> > Front end CLI (*) >>>> > Front end curses GUI (*) >>>> > (*) Maybe these 2 alternatives should be >>>> > the first question the installer asks ? >>>> > Front end X11 GUI (for later after main install complete >>>> > - Shudder, Not that I'd use it, but >>>> > someone >>>> > would probably want to write one). >>>> > vi - for editing, & writing back to new boot media, >>>> > to auto install on multiple identical new machines. >>>> >>>> >>>> I would sooner stab myself in the face. >>> >>> Not obvious at all which your personal revulsion applies to >>> CLI ? ncurses ? install.cfg ?, X11 ?, vi ? >> >> >> All of the above. The bug list for sysinstall is not small. Even if >> this wasn't the case, I'm not even going to work on introducing that >> many options and obfuscating the code that much more. The mere thought >> of the rewrite involved in adding that kind of support makes my head >> feel like the knife is already in place. > > The idea is that it "simplifies" the code by making it more modular. > All the final "sysinstall" has to do is execute the specifics of > install.cfg. It's just a text file, anything can modify it - of > course, in a standardised way. The suggestion is to develop front-ends > that can generate/modify such a file which the installer back-end will > execute. Think of it as functional programming for installers - define > the installations options in a declarative way, and let the installer > take care of the rest. > > Yes, trying to implement such a thing may drive you to stab yourself > in the face - you can do that with a toothpick, but the idea should > cause you to sharpen a different blade. No one is asking you to do it, > just think of some possibilities. > > >> The only support I've been *thinking* about adding is a simple CLI in >> addition to the existing libdialog (ncurses) install. This would still >> be a not insignificant modification, but there are issues that make >> using a libdialog based installer problematic on some displays. It's a >> fun idea to kick around, but it's not a priority. >> >> I don't even know what you mean by vi, but it sounds confusing and >> unnecessary. This is what install.cfg is for - so you can define the >> parameters of an installation beforehand. > > vi is an arcane, obscure text editor that is used by alpha/uber-geeks > to modify *.cfg files ;) No one in their right mind would suggest the > possibility of manually editing a text file, let alone the sysinstall > .cfg file. Who knows what configuration options would be possible?
Yeah... I know what vi *is*. I don't see how it's relevant as an installation option. And by the way, you do edit the install.cfg file by hand. We don't have a handy tool to automagically create one of these as far as I know. You know what options are possible by looking at the sysinstall man page, looking at the example install.cfg file, or reading sysinstall.h. > > Having cli/X11/ncurses/text interfaces to install.cfg seems ideal to > me. The technical difficulty alone would in all likelihood ground it, > it doesn't need to be shot down. I'm shooting it down as in "I am not doing this" because I'm currently the person working on sysinstall. ;) -- randi _______________________________________________ freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-advocacy To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-advocacy-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
